mr. mueller. the president can fire the person who appointed mr. mueller because that person, mr. rosenstein, is a political appointee. and under our laws and tradition pretty much the president can fire people who are political appointees for any reason. can't be a corrupt purpose but we allow the president to pick and choose his team and to fire people for any reason when they're a political appointee. but if you're a civil servant working for the government and not a political appointee you can't be removed but you have due process protections. what is the special counsel? the special counsel is not appointed by a political -- by the president. they're appointed by somebody who is a political appointee when there's a conflict of interest. the reason we have a special counsel is because of the conflict of interest regarding the 2016 election. almost all special counsels are involved in high-profile matters or they wouldn't exist. so what i've tried to do with my colleagues -- senators tillis, booker and coons -- is to -- find protections that is pretty -- if a special counsel is

mr. mueller and his investigation to make sure it is completed in a professional way. that is the reason that brings us to this moment. senators on the other side can say this is not about mueller but let's be honest about it, it is. we had our coming together because of his completing this investigation. i want to salute him and his departure here. even when i disagree with him he makes a thoughtful presentation on the constitutional principles. in this particular case though i think many on this committee are so smitten with the formerly chief justice that they look for scalia to sizes instead of stare decisis. we have an existing decision by the supreme court on morrison that has not been overturned. it may be controversial and maybe justice scalia is right. is the controlling law for this moment and the morris decision giveses us some basis r we have seen today. i want to address the point made by senator cornyn which is come up repeatedly. how many times we heard this committee, will do what you wish in the senate judiciary committee by former senator sessions may

mr. mueller is not the type who is intimidated, and neither does mr. rosenstein seem to be. and these questions were crucial to me. at a key position like secretary of state -- and a key position like secretary of state should be able to speak out on this kind of issue because america is recognized throughout the world as the country that most prizes rule of law. so if our secretary doesn't speak out strongly against this, it's not only bad for our country but not good for his job, his ability to do his job around the world. unfortunately, i was deeply disappointed. mr. pompeo responded when put to the question as whether he would stand up to the president, would he resign or otherwise protest the president's actions that would undermine rule of law, his answers were weak. he did not say he would resign if the president fired mueller or rosenstein. to me, a cabinet officer should do that. he did not even unequivocally state that he would publicly urge the president not to fire mr. mueller. so that wasn't good enough. but i thought i owed again mr. pompeo a direct discussion

that is the mandate that mr mueller had from the acting attorney general.out this raid on the attorney ‘s office. the attorney—client privilege in your law and in american law, which of course we inherited the doctrine from the mother country, is sacrosanct. there are exceptions and thatis sacrosanct. there are exceptions and that is going to be looked at. i'm happy ina that is going to be looked at. i'm happy in a way thatjudge would imposed additional safeguards to try to protect the attorney—client privilege of this entire process. but as i understand it the southern district of new york is looking at amongst other things possible wire fraud, campaign finance violations. if they fight evidence of that presumably the implications are quite serious and the motivation must surely be for mr mueller to have something that he can flip him on. except this would not be related asi on. except this would not be related as i see it to the issue of russian collusion. now has the investigation been expanded with the permission of the deputy attorney general who was t

mr. mueller and mr. rosenstein are in that group. and the f.b.i. are the finest law enforcement people in our country. mr. ray heads that office up. esides being outstanding of rectitude what else did mr. ray, mr. rosenstein, and mr. mueller have in common? they are all republicans. and they have all been attacked by our president. our president said, when the warrant was issued on his attorney's office for his materials, that that was an attack on our country. in my opinion, that statement our justice s on department and our f.b.i. and our mr. rosenstein and mr. mueller and mr. ray, those were the our justice attacks on our country. when one undermines the justice department and the f.b.i., basically people working in the federal government to protect us and see that our laws are carried out in an appropriate a manner, and that the rule of law which this country is respected for all around the world is meated out in an -- meted out in an evenhanded fashion, that is a fundamental principle of the united states of america. i resent that suggestion.

mr. mueller or mr. rosenstein are intimidated. a key position like secretary ot state should able to speak out on this kind of issue. america is recognized throughout the world as the country that most of the price is the rule of law. the retiree doesn't speak out strongly above it -- about if it's not only bad for country but it's not good for his job. unfortunately i was deeply disappointed. mr. pompeo responded when put the question is whether he would stand up to the president would he resign or otherwise protest and the president's actions that would undermine the rule of law and his answer was weak. he did not say he would resign if the president fired mueller or rosenstein. toet me a cabinet officer should do that. he did not even unequivocally state that he would publicly urged the president not to fire mr. mueller so that's was not good enough. but i thought i owed mr. pompeo a direct d discussion because he is a talented man and the president does deserve the benefit of theso doubt. i called them into my office for one f

mr. mueller fired mr.be that is obstruction of justice, interfering with an investigation.at what i'm saying is, when i watch people come on tv and say, he could be subpoenaed. anybody cannot know mike could be subpoenaed. he's the president of the united states and you better have a strong reason for trying to drag him in front of a grand jury, number one. number two, a federal judge is not going to accept that kind of a spectacle. mr. mueller knows that way that is why they are trying to negotiate the kind of a deal. they will drag a president, who is dealing with all these issueg all over the world, who is dealing with china and russia, north korea, iran, so forth, and bring him in front of a grand jury? the judge does not want that kind of aa constitutional crisi. that is why mr. mueller is trying to get wow negotiate some basis to interview mr. trump. if i were mr. trump, i would say, i didn't do anything wrong and that is exactly why i'mid nt talking to you. number one. i will protect this office for

mr. mueller should subpoena mr. trump, i would say no. i think mueller should invite president trump to sit down for an interview and if president trump declines, i think mueller should continue with his investigation and not subpoena the president because that will only slow down mueller's investigation. >> let me check twitter in a second and we'll see if this has changed yet again. steven, chris, kelen, thank you very much. >>> coming up, more on the breaking news of house speaker paul ryan saying he will not be seeking re-election and we are learning another republican congressman, another member of the republicans that work with paul ryan is saying the very same. he is joining me next. one of the reasons for his retirement. we'll find out. almost $800 when we switched our auto and home insurance. with liberty, we could afford a real babysitter instead of your brother. hey! oh, that's my robe. is it? when you switch to liberty mutual, you could save $782 on auto and home insurance. and still get great coverage for you and your family.

mr. mueller is not the type who's intimidated and neither does mr. and these questions were crucial to me. and the key position like secretary of state should be able to speak out on this kind of issue. because america is recognized throughout the world as the country that most prizes were off-topic so far secretary doesn't speak a song against this. it's not like bad for our country but not good for his job. his ability to do his job around the world. unfortunately, i was deeply disappointed. mr.po pompeo responded when puto the question is whether he would stand up to the president, but he resign or otherwise protest the president actions that would of law?e the rule his answers were weak. he did not say he would resign if the president fired molar or rosenstein. to me, i cabinet officer should do that. he did not even unequivocally state that he would publicly urge the president not to fire mr. mueller. so that wasn't good enough. but i thought i owed again mr. pompeo a direct discussion, because he is a talented man, and the president does deserv

mr. mueller.t is an investigation looking at the russian situation but also looking at whether the president has violated any laws. and i would put a lot more credibility into the investigation by mr. mueller than the comments that are currently being made by anybody. i think the real issue for the united states and for our future will depend a lot more on mr. mueller's investigation than whatever books are written about mr. trump. >> secretary panetta, thank you so much for joining us from california tonight. >>> now, as things heat up inside america, important international relations are cooling down to sub zero temperatures as we've just been discussing with the accusations and insults flying between russia and the west. the u.n. secretary general says the cold war is back only with a crucial difference, communication, that vital safety valve, are worse now than they were back then. the trump administration is deciding whether or not to impose more sanctions on russia, but what will their next

mr. mueller had a conversation with president trump's attorneys on the russia probe. he walked through the president's status at this time. >> special counsel bob mueller is dialing up the pressure. >> cannot have a more formidable adversary if you are a bad guy that bob mueller. >> the u.s. intelligence community says the russians tried to come in and influence our election. who did it? how did they do it? was anyone here helping. >> the russia investigation is intensifying. >> they didn't just simply ask the trump organization for cooperation. he went straight to the subpoena. >> the stakes are high and battle lines are ground. >> the entire thing has been a witch hunt. >> the president unleashing his attack on the special counsel. >> he can't be intimidated. >> how far will this go? >> if president trump decided to fire robert mueller, it would be a very, very dangerous proposition. >> where will it end? >> there could be a domino affect that leads to the end of this presidency. robert mueller's findings could be that first piece to fall. >> who is the man behind th

mr. mueller's investigation is

mr. mueller directly.his attitude would be if he was told to go fire mueller. >> although you ended up getting him fired. the weird thing about this entire inessential like through the looking glass environment is the president watches cable news. i can't tell where the circle begins and where it ends. is he getting the idea from cable news? are they getting it from him? is he just sitting there absorbing it all. >> there's another crazy aspect that goes back to why the rnc doesn't feel the need to distance itself. it's stipulated that he's some sort of criminal. >> you're exactly right. >> they're not trying to make the argument he's not corrupt. part of the argumentyear mueller needs to be kept in the box if mueller is allowed to get too many mings things, he's going to find criminal activity. it's like everyone stipulated to the idea that there is some unrelated to -- the dispute is was there a crime related to russia. police are admitting there is a bunch of criminal activity that has nothing do with t

mr. mueller is trying to negotiate some basis to interview mr. trump. but if i were mr.ump i'd say you know what? i didn't do anything wrong, that's why i'm not talking to you. number one. i'll protect the office for the democrat and republicans elected to the president of the united states, number two. you have crimes that you want to prosecute? go for it, baby. but i didn't commit a crime. i'm not going to be indicted. i'm not going to be dragged in front of a federal grand jury and that is that. that is what the president should say. >> sean: let me ask the next question because this is key. there have been very few of us that have done a deep dive into this corrupt team that robert mueller put together. everyone will say he is beyond reproach. well, look at his handling in the anthrax case post-9/11. look at the case when he was in boston as it relates to whitey bolger. four innocent people went to jail. $100,000 plus settlement. two of the four died in jail. then you have weissman and mueller's pitbull. a guy twice excoriated by judges for withholding expulptory evi

mr. mueller. i think he is way too smart for that. he hasn't fired mr. mueller. i don't think mr. e fired. i think mr. mueller ought to be allowed to finish this investigation. the president i know has vented. he is upset about it. i'd be upset about it, too. he is trying to run the country and i'm sure he is irritated about the investigation but we have to let mr. mueller finish. i don't see any indication that mr. trump is going to fire mr. mueller. i mean, it would be like introducing a bill to say well, the president can't get out of nafta. well, he hasn't gotten out of nafta. he is renegotiating it. why don't we wait and see how it turns out before we have our 19th nervous breakdown? >> sandra: here is dianne feinstein the ranking member on the committee. i'm glad the bill is bipartisan. republicans and democrats must ensure special counsel mueller can continue his investigation without interference. based on everything we just discussed, senator, i think it's safe to say you feel that he is capable of continuing a fair investigation. >> i didn't understand that question. >> s

mr. mueller. also tonight, the associated press reports that today trump, quote, privately pondered firing deputy attorney general rod rosenstein and publicly mused about firing special counsel robert mueller. those reports come just hours after we heard this in today's white house press briefing. >> does he believe he has the power to fire special counsel robert mule center does he believe that's within his power? >> certainly he believes he has the power to do so. >> you say president president believes he has the power to fire robert mueller because most legal experts believe he would have to order deputy attorney general rod rosenstein to fire robert mueller and rosenstein could refuse. >> i know a number of individuals in the legal community and including at the department of justice that he has the power to do so, but i don't have any further announcements. >> and that came just 24 hours after we heard this. >> why don't you just fire mule center. >> why don't i just fire mule center. >> jus

mr. mueller. and this is part of what appears to me at least as someone who follows this very closely a campaign wherever it's orchestrated to undermine rosenstein, undermine mueller, undermine the f.b.i. and tha puts us in uncharted territories. >> woodruff: finally ati qu or two about mike mike pompey. you have not said whether you will vote for him. do you think he will be confirmed? >> that's actively discussed but i feel no presre to rush to decision at this point of time choosing a new secretary of state. acknowledging a new secretary oe state ha approved is a really weighty decision. >> woodruff: senator mark mark warner. thank you very much. >> thank you, judy. >> woodruff: now, to cuba. today marked the end era: the rule of the castro brothers. ththe late fidel castro an his younger brother raul controlled cuba for nearly 60 years. now, as william branghamre rts, a younger generation takes the helm amid re-ignited tensions with the united states. >> brangham: applause echoed throughout cub

mr. mueller. i know the president is frustrated.e's told me over and over he did nothing to collude with the russians. he thinks this thing is kind of running outside the boundaries here. but at the end of the day, mueller needs to continue to do his job and without political interference, and i think most members of congress view it that way. >> but he did have the opportunity to say that, to say, no, i have no reason not to want to fire bob mueller yesterday. he was asked directly and he didn't say no. as you mentioned, you and most republicans said mueller should be able to finish his investigation and finish his job. is there any reason not to act now as a member of congress before trump fires mueller to prevent him from firing mueller? >> well, all i can say is that mr. mueller, to be removed, has to be removed for cause. i have legislation that would require a court to look at a removal of the special counsel as to whether or not it fits in the definition for cause, not just for mueller or for any future special counsel. but t

mr. mueller's investigation.the normal course of an impeachment, before the impeachment happened, we would have a senate committee looking into the facts, which started but got squashed. we would have a congressional committee looking into the facts, which started but got squashed. so, in fact, we've done our homework and constitutional experts say that we've met the criteria for impeachment. >> look, on the obstruction of justice charge, mr. mueller hasn't even named the president as a target yet. so he hasn't reached that stage on a charge that they are investigating, and he has much more access to information than any of us and, in fact, a degree in the law. as you point out neither of us have that. and he hasn't named him as a target. i think it may come to the point at some point in the future that some of this will lead to impeachment. it could happen. but we ought to give the american people the confidence that it's done on the basis of facts and on the basis of law, and so, you know, to list them and say

mr. mueller because they're worried that president trump might purger himself. the other argument is we will not sit down with special counsel mueller so long as he's engaged in an unconstitutional obstruction of justice probe. so either come out and say that that is not something that you're looking at or we're not parlaying with you at all. >> the second bold step that you talk about is the idea of declassifying a ton of documents. tell me about that. >> yeah. i think -- the president, again -- this is another core constitutional function. the commander-in-chief, he has the ability, ultimate say over classification. he needs to go, direct the justice department to completely release everything underlying this fisa application, everything to do with the fbi's russia investigation in 2016. obviously with deference to sources and methods. the public needs to see this. the justice department are doing their best to keep it hidden from congress. >> what do you think people would see if those documents were released? >> well, it would answer a lot of questions that c

mr. mueller is saying behind the scenes because he has been to quiet publicly. so have his colleagues in the special counsel's office. we have reported and confirmed that in early march mr. mueller had a conversation with president trump's attorneys on the russia probe and he walked through the president's status at this time that he is now someone who is being -- he's not a witness in the investigation, but he is someone who they would like to interview to learn more about his intent when it came to some of his key decisions in his presidency because they're trying to finish a report on potential obstruction of justice. >> quote, the president has privately expressed relief at the description of his legal status which has increased his determination to agree to a special counsel interview, the people said. he's repeatedly told allies that he is not a target of the probe and believes an interview will help him put the matter behind him, friends said. however legal experts said mueller's description of trump as the subject of a grand jury probe does not mean he's

mr. mueller investigation as well?t giuliani did may have been a crime. >> we're talking about memos. that's what i'm trying to get to the bottom of. >> it implies what you're saying is comey did too if comey is the leak. >> that's correct. >> where could that even come from? to allude to the guy that was going out and defending the president on the "access hollywood" tape that would be the last guy you would leak to, isn't it? >> it's a question that hasn't been asked by anyone of mr. comey. did you talk to giuliani? is that he how he knew on october 25th leaking information, which giuliani admit cod be a crime. and it's another part of this irony that now giuliani -- remember, he is supposed to be secretary of state and attorney general. suddenly he disappeared. >> i see what you're doing there, lanny. we can pose a question and say i wonder if jim comey talked to rudy giuliani. by posing a question you're implicit in that is an accusation. what's the accusation? >> my accusation is rudy giuliani said he heard from c

mr. mueller will get them. host: first call from illinois, line, bob, you are on with our guest, bill pascrell, of new jersey. ahead. guest: morning, bob. caller: hi. pros and cons about making the tax cut permanent for the people. guest: yes. what they are doing now, they got tremendous pushback because permanent for corporations, as you know, bob, but it wasn't made permanent for the middle class and anybody else. is playing to me catch-up politics. towarned them what was going happen. should be across the board, why are corporations more important than individuals? enough people with decisions to show that maybe corporations should be treated also, they are treated in terms of campaign financing anyway. host: from ohio, independent ron, good morning. caller: good morning. morning, congressman. sir?: how are you, caller: fine, thank you. my question is, the corporate to 21%. 35% guest: i didn't vote for that. glad.r: good, i'm how much better would it have een to lower it from 35 to 25 or even 24 and put the

mr. mueller would play with the president's emotions? >> well -- as the legal experts we talked to said, there is sort of a stunningly thin line between a subject, which is what the president currently is, and a target, which is what he is at risk of becoming, and no one wants to be a target. basically if the president goes and sits down before mueller and his investigators, someone like mr. trump is taking a real risk in part because he's someone who we know has a penchant for misleading statements and false statements. that's the very sort of thing that makes you move from a subject to a target. so while the president has expressed relief and has been going around telling friends and allies he's not a target, he has nothing to worry about right now he doesn't in this immediate moment, doesn't necessarily have something to worry about. the concern from some but not all of his legal team unless he does go and does sit down, he could dance over that line into quite dangerous territory. >> jennifer, i talked to a veteran washington lawyer

mr. mueller and avoid a constitutional crisis. the evidence is staring us all in the face. we cannot ignore the elephant in the room any longer. because the consequences of the president taking action against mueller or rosenstein or issuing political pardons is just too dire. as many republicans have said, such action would precipitate a constitutional crisis in this country. the president doesn't seem to realize it, but i know my republican colleagues do. no person is above the law in this country, not even the president. he's not a king. he's the president. if the president were to interfere in any way with the chain of command in the russian investigation or clean house at the justice department in order to install lackeys who would carry out his orders, we would be no better than a banana republic. the things we see happening in other parts of the globe would be happening here. in those places, leaders use the levers of power to subvert or avoid accountability in all ways. president trump seems to wish he could do just that. i want to be crystal clear on that point. if

mr. mueller and mr. rosenstein to do their work. if he has nothing to fear, quit acting like you're guilty. let us find out. let the american people find out exactly what took place. >> to your point about that trump tower meeting, i want to play for you what the president said about the russian lawyer specifically at the heart of that meeting? she told my colleague, richard engel, that she's an informant for the russian government. here's what the president said about that last night. >> you heard about the lawyer? for a year, a woman lawyer, she was like, oh, i know nothing, know nothing. now all of a sudden she supposedly is involved with the government. you know why? if she did that. because putin and the group said, you know, this trump is killing us. why don't you say that you're involved with government so that we can go and make their life in the united states even more chaotic. >> what did you hear in that explanation, congressman? >> it's hard to tell because it is extraordinarily confusing. let's remember this meeting too

mr. mueller. so i would expect congress and the american people will not allow the president to take those actions without consequences. >> the question becomes i don't know what the consequences would be. mike pompeo, are you a vote for him or goodness him for secretary of state? heitcamp switching her vote. might that happen? >> well, she's not on the committee. >> i'm opposing him in the committee. i do that because i want our chief diplomat to work with the chief partners. pompeo indicated they should go alone. i'm opposing him because i don't believe he would be be an independent voice in the white house. >> the authorization for use of military force. do you believe it needs to be redraft redrafted? do you believe actions like what just happened in syria, no direct criticism of president trump but of all of you in presidents overstep their ting statutory authority to conduct military actions against sovereign nations? do you have to change that? >> i believe congress needs to pass an updated

mr. mueller to complete his investigation. don't interfere with him, don't interfere with mr. rosenstein, let's get the job done. neil: senator apparently rod rosenstein met with the president last week. we are told even though it's not confirmed that he told the president in the second time in as many months you are not the focus of target of this robert mueller investigation. do you believe that? >> i have confidence in mr. rosenstein. i have confidence in mr. mueller i want both of them to be able to do their jobs. i think the fewer comments we made about we make about conclusions, the better off we are. give them the space they need to complete this very important investigation. neil: is it your sense then, sir , that people have looked at this and wondered where the investigation is going and where post the raid of the president's lawyer's office and home that it was veering in a very very different direction, is it your sense that it is that this is now way beyond talk of collusion to maybe other business matters? >> well, look, i don't know exactly how all these things

mr. mueller. i think if he wants to get somewhere with mr. mueller, he needs to demonstrate that he is advising his client to be cooperative. not to force them to go to the courts, including the supreme court. to enforce a subpoena, requiring -- forcing the president to testify under oath. that's going to happen. the president is going to have to provide evidence, and i think that mr. giuliani can do an enormously good service, not only to mr. mueller and the investigation and the country, but also to his client. if he would understand that it's time for them to come up -- to come to an agreement with the special counsel's office about the circumstances pursuant to which the president will provide testimony so that we can get to an end point here. >> much as been said about the president not taking his lawyers' advice, julian. do you think his relationship with giuliani is such he will actually do what giuliani wants? >> no. i think every time we've asked this question, the answer has turned out to be the same, and you might have loggerheads.

mr. mueller who shouldn't have access to all of that?ere is a 100% certainty it will be leaked already, today we've seen some leaking about information regarding republican fund-raiser and his affair with some playmate. leaking is inevitable. when the director of the fbi comey leaks information and launders it through a columbia law professor, and then writes a book in which he leaks information that he learned in confidence from the president we have to understand leaking is part of the way the justice department operates and has always operated. david: if this information, forgive me, if this information has leaked doesn't that pretty much destroy the lawyer client privilege in the united states and isn't mr. mueller responsible for that? >> it already has been destroyed even if it doesn't leak. as soon as fbi agent reads material that is lawyer client privilege the sixth amendment has been violated and the fourth amendment has been violated. i'm against tank teams. i'm a favor of having a judge appointed to go through every communicat

>> speaking of the dossier, mcclatchy reports that special counsel robert mueller has evidence that mr. trump's personal lawyer, michael cohen, made a secret trip to prague in the summer of 2016, a claim that was made in said dossier which included a report that he met there with a putin ally. in the past cohen has denied ever visiting prague and on saturday he denied the again -- it again, calling the story bad reporting, bad information and bad story. nbc news has not confirmed the report. on monday cohen's office was raided by the fbi, a move that unnerved mr. trump who has always investigated a personal investigation into his business dealings a red line. some trump allies used the raid to argue deputy attorney general rod rosenstein should be fired. >> rod rosenstein is so incompetent, compromised and conflicted that he can no longer serve as the deputy attorney general. >> and joining me now is republican senator joni ernst of iowa. a member of the armed services committee and a veteran who served in the middle east during the iraq war. welcome to "meet the press." >> good mornin

mr. mueller. i think by going into mr.'s office and getting his information, that has completely changed the dynamic of this game. >> it looks to me again tonight the president is up to his elbows in alligators. thank you so much robert and barry. republicans won a special election last night in arizona but shouldn't be popping the champagne bottles about the race was much closer than expected. that's a bad sign for november. you're watching "hardball." dav. what's going on? oh hey! ♪ that's it? yeah. that's it? everybody two seconds! "dear sebastian, after careful consideration of your application, it is with great pleasure that we offer our congratulations on your acceptance..." through the tuition assistance program, every day mcdonald's helps more people go to college. it's part of our commitment to being america's best first job. need a change of scenery? the kayak price forecast tool tells you whether to wait or book your flight now. so you can be confident you're getting the best price. giddyup! kayak. search one an

mr. mueller because mueller was on the verge of finding russian collusion or conspiracy or coordination which i don't believe is the case. i suggested the president should fire mr. rosenstein because of his role of approving the trump campaign of falsifying the dossier and i think the president should direct the attorney general to appoint a special couns special prosecutor to look at fisa abuses. >> do you think the attorney general should be placed? the president has been publicly, i don't know if humiliating is the right word but has had tough words for him over a long period of time. >> i have been deeply disappointed in the attorney general and i have said again, commentary for info wars and at the stone cold truth that i think the president should dismiss his attorney general. >> have you had contact with mueller's office at this point? >> i have not. >> would you agree to sit down for an interview? >> i would need to know a great deal more about what they wanted to talk about. right now in the mainstream media, we have an ongoing story which is not, not new pertaining to this e-mail an

mr. mueller and those close to him know. everything else is pure speculation. makes for, i guess, interesting water cooler talk. i try not to get lubed up one way or the other because we don't know. >> neil: we do not. i appreciate your patience with this breaking news. if i can get you back on the zuckerberg team. >> you bet. >> neil: good seeing you. we did get more details from "the new york times" what was seized, taken and other interests of the authorities when they seize the records. they include among other items communications between the president and mr. cohen. again, the lawyer whose offices were raided, which would require a specialty of agents to review because conversations between lawyers and clients are protected from scrutiny in most instances, which is a good point to bring in my friend and one of the smartest lawyers i know, just andrew andrew napolitano. >> and what stuart varney said, isn't there a attorney client protection? my quick response was, not if there's a serious allegation of unlawful activity by the lawyer with the client. reme

mr. mueller at this point, that the d.o.j. oing without the credibility issues of the mueller operation. david: tom, let us know if you receive anything, we'll put you back on air. tom fitton from judicial watch. thank you very much. appreciate it. >> you are very welcome. melissa: ibm down more than 5% afterours, despite beating first quarter revenue. the issue is growth profit margins. profitin margins hammered ibm shares after the last earnings report in january when the stock tumbled 4%. ibm on track to shave 60 points off the dow when stocks open tomorrow morning. david: a closed-door briefing on capitol hill. defense secretary james mattis and general joseph dunford meeting on syria. what we can expect? coming up. melissa: starbucks closing its doors for a few hours. why and when the coffee chain won't be open for business? because my body can still make its own insulin. and i take trulicity once a week to activate my body to release it, like it's supposed to. trulicity is not insulin. it comes in a once-weekly, truly eas

mr. mueller's investigation. deal for the north american trade agreement may not be finalized before the summit of the americas this month in peru. trump nafta talks at a cabinet meeting today at the white house. a long way: we have to go, but we have made tremendous progress. we are fairly close on nafta, and we don't make the right deal will terminate nafta and make the right deal after that. bloomberg reported last week the white house is pushing for a preliminary deal to be announced at the summit. facebook ceo mark zuckerberg was in washington today ahead of his much anticipated testimony tomorrow before the senate commerce committee. lawmakers want answers about facebook's data privacy scandal. he met today with committee's top democrats, bill nelson of florida. veryu said to me forthrightly we were lied to and we should have caught that. but i think in today's world that is naive. mark: in prepared remarks released by facebook, zuckerberg will tell lawmakers i started facebook, i run it, and i am responsib

mr. mueller would have had access to cia files that he needed. and cia's role is to not look at activities of individual americans by any mean, but there is a full record there and they can provide what they need. >> i want to switch to syria. you were the head of the cia during the obama era, during this time when the president almost conducted similar military strikes to try to punish assad for using chemical weapons in 2013. instead an agreement was cut with the russians to get rid of the chemical weapons. were we -- in hindsight, was the obama administration extraordinarily naive to think that the russians would do this? did you guys know then that they were hiding chemical weapons at the time that they claimed they were destroying them? >> it's not they were hiding chemical weapons. the ability to reconstitute the chemical weapons program is very easy, and just the way the trump administration and the continued use of the strikes. i'm sure the strike which was a tactical and surgical success, has been a step back, but that does not mean they

mr. mueller. if he fires mr. mueller. that's what the market is reacting to. i have no idea if that's under consideration. but to me that's what the market reacted to today market on friday held very critical levels. had a miserable day friday, but it held exactly where it needed to technically and today the follow-through was outstanding. and we've been talking about that right now except for this so what does it mean it means to me there is still the key level in the s&p is 25.80. and we'll see if we protect it tomorrow >> agree this could be something really big. we don't know. >> right. >> but one thing to me that was interesting, even earlier in the day, before any of this happened, before we saw this and the market was up a lot, vix was still very high. why is that? because we've had such volatile sessions even so a rise like we had today -- that was a signal to you, a warning line perhaps. >> yes >> i was watching the currency markets all day. you saw strength in the yen and weakness in the dollar and that had occurred well before this raid happened. so

mr. mueller. and clearly, and i think in many views, that would cross the line. >> the senate majority leader mitch mcconnell is reluctant to consider legislation to protect the special counsel robert mueller. he said it is unnecessary. because he didn't believe the president will actually remove the special counsel. how do you see it? >> well, you listen to the president. he really is -- is selling doubt in the investigation which is obviously attempting to influence the investigation. we could protect the integrity of the investigation by passing a pretty simple statute to protect the special counsel, that protects mr. mueller. we should have done that a long time ago. the president's threats should not be used to try to influence this investigation. >> how would t-- would the congress react, senator, if the president were to fire mueller. >> i do think that would create a constitutional crisis and you would see the american people and the members of congress take steps in order to make sure tha