robert mueller, sir? - thank you. sure. success starts with intuit quickbooks.ident trump will agree to an interview with robert mueller, but even though the president has said before 100% he'd be up for it, his lawyers are now reportedly counseling him against it. - so his leading attorney is trying to convince donald trump what every good lawyer tries to convince potentially guilty people. "we don't want you to be interviewed by prosecutors, and we don't want to get you caught in a perjury case." donald trump doesn't like this. he doesn't like that it makes him, in his view, look weak. and in an argument with that lawyer, he fires him. - white house counsel don mcgahn is leaving. the president confirmed the departure with this tweet. - when trump would say, "where's my roy cohn?" he basically wanted someone who would lie for him and someone who would defend him if he lied, because his ethical standards were less than pure. - the high-power, high-profile edition of the president's personal legal team. he has rudy giuliani, whose résumé includes u.s. attorney fo

trump in the white house when he was dealing with the special council investigation he attacked robert mueller that was perhaps despite his aides really not wanting him to go there, trump is really -- his view of this is that the best way to undermine the investigations to go directly at it. you're already seeing this happening with his supporters. they're claiming that because brag is a democrat, that he is advised against trump that may or may not be true, trump also calls brag racist perhaps because he happens to also be black. these are all that sort of types of attacks some of them political, some just straight up, and he'll throw everything at this, his supporters eat it up and take this stuff at his word, and they repeat it and it becomes part of the narrative that helps in knock late him he believes against some investigation >> two different worlds, the one out here the political world then inside the courtroom. we were just talking about with abby the political attacks on alvin bragg, these public attacks on alvin bragg can they get from the political world to the legal world to the

you've been questioned by special counsel robert mueller in the russia investigation.ends, i believe. you've also testified the congress. november 2017, you told congress under oath you play quote, no official or really, unofficial role in the trump campaign. what you didn't tell congress is on august 3rd, 2016, you were in a meeting during the campaign at trump tower with don jr., trump's son, with stephen miller, then a campaign adviser to trump, with georgia later, a former blackwater colleague of your, to access affection to the saudis and emiratis, who also happens to be a convicted pedophile, and also joel -- and it's really expert on social media manipulation. how come you didn't mention that meeting to congress, given its relevant to their investigation? >> i did. as part of the investigations, i certainly disclosed in the meetings that very -- >> not immigration will testimony to the house. we went through. what you didn't mention anything about august 2016 meeting in trump tower. they specifically asked you what context you had, and you didn't answer. >> i do

attorney general's office, to the manhattan district attorney's office, to the special counselor, robert mueller'se. had is a man here who is at the heart of this relationship here with donald trump, and yet, we should note it was at the time of his sentencing that robert mueller in a letter to the judge at the time said that he did believe that michael cohen had offered up credible testimony. at the same time, he stopped short of making him a cooperating witness because of some of these questions here at hand, and now as michael cohen goes before, you know, potentially the grand jury here yet again today, it's going to be jurors that ultimately decide whether there is enough corroborating evidence to indict the former president based off -- largely off of michael cohen's initial testimony, and to note exactly what do they have in their possession? we don't have all the answers to that. we do know that michael cohen has publicly released checks from donald trump to him in 2017 for the stormy daniels payments here, and when he entered that plea agreement back in 2018, we as the public never was abl

he attacked robert mueller specifically, and directly in that time. that was perhaps despite his aides really wanting him to go there. trump is really, his view of this is the best way to undermine the investigation is to go directly at it. you are already seeing this happening with his supporters. they are claiming that because bragg is a democrat that he is biased against trump. that may or may not be true. trump also calls brag racist perhaps because he also happens to be black. these are all types of attacks. some of them political, some of them straight up ad hominem. he will throw everything at this because his supporters really added up. they take this stuff at his word and they repeat it. it becomes part of the narrative that helps him. he believes at least against some of these investigations. >> all right, there are two very different worlds. there is the world out here, the political world, and there is the world inside the courtroom. what we were just talking about with abby, these political attacks on alvin bragg, these public attacks on

one of the senior prosecutor on the robert mueller specia counsel investigation.andrew, what a day thank you for making time to b here tonight >> you're welcome. did it make your hair stand up the wrong way or did it or acute work you otherwise when said that this is likely to be boring i believe that these charges what we expect them to be an what we have seen of other charges even brought against donald trump in a manhatta criminal court, i feel like we ought to let people know tha this might be something that i sort of like watching pain dry. it might be a little boring. as a prosecutor who has fought many white-collar cases, doe that bother you? did i offend you >> you certainly didn't offend me, rachel i think there are a couple o points one, no matter how much on anticipates a day like this, when it actually happens there is, i think, for anybody, ther is a certain amount that i sinks in what this means i totally agree with you that former president is not immune and can be subject to charges. but it is the case that it has never happened before. to your poi

and as you say, michael, with some success, it worked for him with robert mueller. it worked with the republicans who refused to convict him during his two impeachments. it's probably not going to work with this district attorney in this case. >> and that, for me, is an interesting storyline, because, jennifer, you wrote in your latest column about how voices in the media are worried that an indictment may actually help trump. you said, quote, unfortunately the media seems almost entirely incredulous in airing the view that trump once pushed, the raises possibility of a self fulfilling boost for trump. if poll numbers might spike, that's his little about his ability to navigate a primary season under the shadow of a criminal cased. it almost feels ridiculous to have to say it out loud, but getting indicted is bad for political candidate. >> now, on earth one, that's true. in trump world maybe not so much. >> this is how look at it, taking the law and taking the politics. trump's base has shrunk since he was president and since january 6th. he has to add people back

there was a special counsel investigation conducted by robert mueller. the conclusion that that type of the trump justice department under blower was you could nott, indict a sitting president. so they had to wait until after he had left office. so you have to take away the forest trump was in office because the federal government was paralyzed. it was not about to indict him for the something the constitution of the law that says the president cannot be indicted. he has left office. we had a period of coded, there have been delays. delays are always unfortunate. it's one of the great criticisms of our legal system of any legal system it goes back to shakespeare in hamlet as the laws delay. but now these allegations have surfaced. there allegations related to january 6. which was not so long ago. should be invested by special counsel jack smith. our allegations and georgia being investigated by the district attorney there arising from the election. at i grant you some time has elapsed but we are now reaching the moment of truth. it appears chargers will

by andrew weissma, who spent 20 years at thee1 justice department, including iz tát deputy to robert muellerwhot( helped conduct the capitol security review following the january 6th and andrew weissmann joins me now. walk us through the challenges jf manhattançó in fulton county, i the special counsel's uhaóoffic. if they want to charge an 'fmrñso, you know, there ar sorts of w3issues, and oneçó of prosecutors say is that the fact a case that'slp ve uñe1Ñhigh-pr, doesn't make a Ñidifference, th you follow the facts and the law, andxy other case, and?;■ that is true an ñrextent,w3 butt( chris haye that." he has a point. there are wa] that something is axd high-profe case or it is açó former presidt can come into play. so, let me giveçó youe1e1 ançó 3 because it is a former president and this country has never had that situation before, unlike, for Ñ?1instance, israel wherueh current leaderw3 isw3 acueáÑ unr 3 we tendÑi no to look at international examples. but you do have to think about nal functionxd that and what i meanó[■ by that is,u making sure that peoplew3 understandó[■ that this is n

jurors if he's convicted >> that's the big question he's good -- if you look at what happened to robert muellerrt, including by republicans over the course of the investigation, trump was able to drive down support for mueller and trust in mueller among republicans. he'll do the same thing through this trial it's a different situation when trump is arraigned and becomes a defendant, he's agreeing to obey certain orders in the courtroom issued by the judge. there's a past example of what can happen here. when roger stone, the trump associate who -- you know he was known for dirty tricks when he was on trial, roger stone posted a picture of the federal judge in his case with a cross hair beside her face the judge said that was not allowed and issued a partial gag order that barred roger stone from posting online in any form. you can see if that was done to donald trump, he would say his first amendment rights were being restrained that's the challenge for the judge. how do you give trump a fair trial? how due ro you respect his firs amendment rights >> if this trial gets delayed and starts next y

senior legal affairs reporter the intersection of law and politics including special counsel robert mueller's investigation as well as the initial inquiry into the trump and russia sawgrass. his reporting and legal analysis was featured in outlets such as national public radio, fox news, "new york times" and the republic. just before president obama's inauguration in 2009 is when he joined politico as a white house reporter returning as a correspondent for abc news. in 2019, politico magazine reported on the secret deal between the u.s. and australia dealing with a resettlement of refugees with the most prestigious journalism award. he is also a prestigious user of the freedom of information act and we will of course talk more about this and get into this. next to josh of the "wall street "the wall streetjournal," a cyby reporter whose coverage focuses on national security and geopolitical dimensions of nationstate hacking conflicts, digital espionage with interference in government surveillance. before joining of the journal in 2018, dustin worked at reuters and national journal he and his r

joining us is michael zeldin, a former prosecutor and robert mueller's special assistant at the department of justice. a spokesperson for trump says they've not heard from the manhattan district attorney's office. what do you make of the former president releasing a statement like this, saying that he would be arrested on tuesday? >> well, i think one that's probably going to be followed by a fund-raising letter and, two, i think it probably is a political stunt to get people riled up, maybe perhaps to pressure the manhattan district attorney's office to reconsider the viability or the sensibility of bringing charges against him. >> okay. and then if it were to happen, meaning, there would be an indictment, there would be an arrest involving a former president. how would that work? how would it play out? would it mean that if the president were in florida, we would have to travel on his own, or would there be an escort to new york? would there be mug shots? what would happen because it would be the former president of the united states? >> he's still a former president, so he would travel

hosted by andrew weissmann was spent 20 years at the justice department including as a deputy to robert muelleris investigation into the ex president. and by mary mccord, a veteran prosecutor helped conduct the capitol security review followed the january 6th insurrection. and andrew weizmann joins me now. andrew, thanks for coming back on the show. walk us through the challenges for all the prosecutors in manhattan and in fulton county and the special counsel's office. if they want to charge the ex president with a crime. >> there are all sorts of issues and one of the things you already mentioned and heard your prosecutor say is that the fact that it is the former president had a very high profile it is going to make a difference when you follow the law and you take it like any other case. that is true to an extent. but chris hayes actually an homage to him i believe that he has a point. which is that there are ways in which the fact that something is a high profile case for the former president can come into play. let me give you an example. because it is the former president and this countr

this case going after money from the vice president, and fighting that in court in a way that robert mueller, was never willing to do to get donald trump to testify. >> very good point, katie, do we have a sense of where council direction it might be on the january 6th case. for a lot of watching, as some of the official case, because, to the insurrection, documents, hush money case, now appealing comparison to january 6th. >> right, and one of the cases it feels very important to people, was the undermining democracy, was in doing the american projects. and that's what people really want to see prosecutors in the criminal justice system address. now that said, it's not clear that they're close to doing anything directly about donald trump, from our reporting, seems like prosecutors are looking at evidence as many people in his orbit, but at the same time, whether or not those people actually flip on trump and give evidence, help prosecutors shore up the really airtight solar case that want to bring before the jury, is up in the air. like trump, said the documents case is much more straightf

trump was already under federal investigation by special counsel robert mueller over his campaign's connections to a russian influence operation, and on that day the wall street journal broke the news and we first heard the name stormy daniels. here's the headline. trump lawyer arranged $130,000 payment for adult film star's silence. a trump lawyer and a fixer named michael cohen had paid stormy daniels $130,000 in the waning days of the 2016 campaign to buy ms. daniels' silence about her alleged affair with donald trump. cohen was later reimbursed by president trump who was now in the white house. and all of a sudden that hush money payment to karen mcdougal back in 2016, that all came back into focus. and it caught the attention of prosecutors in new york. the manhattan district attorney was reportedly thinking of bringing criminal charges, but federal prosecutors were also interested in opening their own investigation into all this. according to reports, the feds basically told the manhattan prosecutors to back off. but we know how that ended. after conducting their own federal investigation

. >> is your testimony here is that you disagree with the two indictments by special robert mueller theinitively established that russia interfered in our 2016 election through social media disinformation, and the hacking leak operation? >> i do not agree. >> do you agree with those two indictments customer? you disagree it is about 40-50 pages customer do you disagree with the evidence outlined in those indictments customer >> indictments or discharges. >> do you disagree in the evidence included in those indictments? yes or no? >> not in the jury of that case i could not say that. i think it may have on a small scale but certainly not been reported. >> what's reported or included in the indictments? >> indictments or allegation they are not proof. >> there pretty detailed allegation. you should go read the indictment and then come back and tell us if you actually think that there is no proof of it. let me move on. please, let me move on that's how this works you should know that by now. >> sean: it worked my way or the highway let's move on and let's not talk about anything that means

now is a former national security official at doj and a former prosecutor on special counsel robert mueller's team. brandon,'s thank you for being here. what a time to talk to you about what is going on specifically this reporting. i wonder after you read it what stuck out to you? did the relationship between the prosecutors and the fbi agents sound like the experience you have had or was it different? >> well, what stuck out the most is that they were individuals, senior officials who were part of this deliberation that chose to leak this information right at the time that the department of justice and fbi are likely making a charging decision. a debate, deliberation, disagreement as mentioned is s common, does occur. but when you have a leak like this, it undermines the integrity of the u investigatio. importantly how do those individuals, those same individuals go into s the room d have an honest and candid discussion about charges knowing that there were people who if they don't -- if the decision goes against them, if there's a disagreements that they may ai their dpreefbances publicly?

so it will take a little while. >> and you work for a man in robert mueller who said if i could say crimes were not committed, i would. so clearly the public has been hearing from highly regarded prosecutors for six years now that donald trump has committed crimes and nothing has happened. what are the stakes in your mind of showing that we do not live in a country with two standards of justice? >> i think that that is exactly the right question. a lot of people have been saying is this the crime that you should start with. and i don't think that that is the way that alvin bragg will be looking at it and i don't think that is what the rule of law requires. i think the way a prosecutor would look at it, not how does it compare to other crimes that donald trump may have committed, but rather is this a crime that is prosecuted. should we be leaving him aside. and i think one answer to that is michael cohen. michael cohen as you pointed out has done jail time in part for doing this and he is less culpable on this crime than the person he did it for. so the rule of law means that you treat like

costello represented michael cohen and he was criticized in the report of special counsel robert muelleror what to me tip toed up to the line of witness tampering. at one point telling michael cohen he has powerful friends, obviously referring to the president, and he should sleep well tonight before he cooperated. trump and trump world turned on cohen of course when he did cooperate. costello's lawyer relationship ended with cohen, now costello is going to come in and share information from that attorney/client relationship, apparently saying that cohen was telling a different story before he cooperated, but, john, we know that already. cohen has admitted to that. so they will bring in cohen, possibly, if costello needs to be rebutted to say, yes, i wasn't candid before i cooperated, i've been candid since. i've analyzed cohen's statements since he began cooperating and they have been rock solid. he's told the same account about the president's hush money to influence the 2016 election. >> so based on what we're seeing here then with costello coming in today, potentially cohen coming ba

to let the courts decide and to push it to the courts, really different from what we saw with robert muellereller did not want to litigate. he had debates with his team about witnesses who would be unfriendly or clog up the courts. he is saying he's both willing to push it to the court, get the decisions and keep moving. he's not going to hold fire just because it could get messy or just because there has to be court intervention or appeals. >> alan weisselberg was trump's and trump's family's ceo for decades and decades. as he sits in rikers island was willing to go to the matt for the trump family. >> it's an interesting comparison. you have vice president mike pence, who was as loyal as he possibly can be to a president before they tell you to overturn an election. but you see the politics here is he wants to be seen as fighting. when you played that point where he said my lawyers will look into this, this is the same mike pence who didn't want to go before the january 6th committee. this is not someone who has wanted to volunteer when it comes to the legality of what was happening, even

jack smith is a special counsel and what trump associates in his mind with a special counsel is robert mueller. that's the one he has been so preoccupied with. it's hard to overstate what an extraordinary situation we are in. we are having the former president launch a third presidential campaign. he is facing an indictment. whether it leads to a conviction, we don't know. he is in a situation where he is meeting with attorneys, he is paying a lot of money to these attorneys. he is frustrated by the fact that it's public how much money is going to legal fees for him. i do think there's a level of concern when it comes to jack smith's investigations. he has been so aggressive, sea subpoenaing people. i think georgia is a top concern for them. they do feel like that could potentially be something where they are not totally sure what that's going to look like if those indictments come out. >> what's the risk of going ahead and prosecuting trump but not getting a conviction? >> i think that's a risk any prosecutor takes. bragg and others, jack smith, shouldn't be worried about it. if they think th

joining me now is former fbi general counsel and former member of robert mueller's special counsel investigation into russian interference in the 2016 election, andrew weissmann, also an msnbc legal analyst, and laura jarrett is with us. laura, let's start with you, and talk about evan corcoran going into the d.c. court today. he was compelled to testify. donald trump's team has not appealed. do we have an idea of why? >> curious, right, you would think they would have thought tooth and nail if they wanted to try to keep this out of the hands of the grand jury. we don't know exactly why. i think there are some informed guesses out there, including from our very own lisa reuben who has suggested in a piece on digital now that perhaps they didn't want to take a shot at losing before the supreme court, and having the court find out what the evidence is to support this idea that the attorney/client privilege should be pierced. remember, the attorney/client privilege, except when it's used in a crime, which the judge thought was justified in this case, and took upon appeal, the presumably the justice

we had robert mueller, oath who swore under oath he didn'the know at the steele dossier was and he didn't know what fusion gbs was that was the pillars of his entire investigation that we had. james comey, who played amnesia two hundred and forty five times under oath, we hadth andrew mccabe admittedly lied to federal investigators four times. these weres or the top people.er now, i don't need to get into christopher wray. he's very decent us . so i don't think people have what they want to believe in. the fbi. lost >> but they lost all confidence in the washington leadership. neither they should disperse it and put the headquarters in kansas or break up the fbi and farm it out to different agencies. buerent agencies, but itt it cae people are afraid of it.. at>> well, i think what we're seeing as well, ari, is this attempt to blame shift on issues like crime that we can see it before our veryd eyes. i mean, things get more vicious, more depraved. i don't think it's just anecdotal. things are changing in this country, not for the better. crim they come to the crime issue. so kyp was asked

most recently served as a prosecutor for robert mueller's special investigation.i guess let's start with the news about cohen going for the grand jury on monday. what does that indicate? >> that would not really be, to me, the key. it is that the da actually asked, according to the new york times, the former president whether he would like to voluntarily appear. i think the combination of michael cohen going into the grand jury and inviting the former president to go in is really key. you just don't invite somebody to go to the grand jury. the targeted investigation unless you're at the final stages. everyone expects that the former presidents going to say no. of course he took the fifth amendment in letitia james civil case, so there's no reason to say he will be i will be happy topic grandeur. when you do in terms of affording him that sort of due process, meaning he has the ability to do that. he can turn it down, which he likely will. >> just more from the new york times reporting, the manhattan district attorney's office is already question at least seven oth

me now andrea spent years working i the justice department and served as a lead prosecutor fo robert mueller's special counsel investigation. andrew, this is an invitatio to trump to testify. it is not a subpoena compellin that testimony can you explain why this invitation to trump to testify indicates that an indictment i likely imminent? >> absolutely. so it is nice to have the ny actually meeting there t start. and you called it to order so i think your term invitatio has really been important. there is an oddity of new york law which is that if you are subpoenaed to testify before the grand jury, that is, you get an actual subpoena that is a legal document, that require you to come to the grand jur and testify. but if you do that you are given what is called transactional immunity the you are given immunity wit respect to the transaction you testify about. so there is no way that if you were thinking of indicting the former president that he would give him a subpoena, and thu trigger transactional immunity instead, as a matter of sort o due process they are giving hi an opportunity and a i

. >> joining me now is former member of robert mueller's special counsel investigation into russian interference election, andrew weissmann, also "new york times" chief who's correspondent and msnbc, peter baker. you had a meeting at fox news a few weeks after the election, and the crisis about whether to make calls. what do you know about the turmoil within fox news right now considering all of these revelations that have come to light in the dominion filings, showing the divide between fox news hosts and executives and the handful of journalists left at the network alongside what's been happening since tucker carlson decided to frame the insurrection as a bunch of meek sight seers who love the capitol. >> that's the thing to remember at fox news there are, in fact, people who want to commit journalism. there are fewer today because some got fired or decided to leave because they have been frustrated by what happened there. they're learning a lot of things in these filings that they didn't know. things they didn't know about what executives were saying and hosts were saying behind the scenes. i

. >>> want to bring in former fbi general counsel and member of robert mueller's investigation into interference in the 2016 election. it's great to talk to you. i want to describe for folks how these, what republicans are calling whistleblowers are being described in this 315 page report and have you weigh in for us. these witnesses are deeply biassed. each endorses an alarming series of conspiracy theories, related to the attack, and the validity of the 2020 election. one has called repeatedly for the dismantling of the fbi, even more alarming, these so called quote unquote whistleblowers are directly connected to a network of extreme maga republican operatives. at network of organizations, appears to have identified these witnesses provided them with financial compensation, and found them employment after they left the fbi. when you listen to this description, andrew, does that null and void any testimony they have provided and being identified as quote unquote whistleblowers? >> it certainly goes a long way to doing that, and just to step back, you know, i worked at the fbi just based on per

brandon van grack, a former national security official at the doj and former prosecutor on the robert mueller counsel team. brandon, thank you for being here, what a time to talk about what is going on, specifically this reporting. i wonder after you read it, what stood out to you? did the relationship between the prosecutors and the fbi agents unlike the experience that you have had, or was it different? >> well, what stuff got the most is that there were individuals, senior officials, who were part of this deliberation, that chose to be disinformation, right at the time that the department of and fbi are likely making a charging decision. debate, deliberation, disagreement, as stephen was mentioning is common, does occur. but when you have a leak like this, it undermines the integrity of the investigation, and most importantly, how do those individuals, those same individuals go into a room and have an honest and candid discussion about charges, knowing that there are people who, if they -- if the decision goes against them, there is disagreement, that they may or their grievances publicly.

the mar-a-lago raid -- howard: robert mueller. >> -- the way a lot of these things were supposed to playey zig when we thought they would zag, and i think we may be in a situation where even with this coming down, it might not be the number one topic come a year and a half from now when they're starting to think about who they're going to vote for. howard: yeah. the media have been so overheated about a lot of these investigations, some of which have gone absolutely nowhere. and i do think that's a good point, on the other hand, if this happens, whether it's tuesday or any other day, i it may be difficult to get any other news. >>> when we come back, ron desantis keeps deflecting questions about former president. we'll hook at the coverage next. -- we'll look at the coverage next. ♪ i heard about the payroll tax refund that allowed us to keep the people that have been here taking care of us. learn more at getrefunds.com. ugh-stipated... feeling weighed down by a backedup gut" miralax is different. it works naturally with the water in your body to unblock your gut. ...free your gut. and y

taibbi in 2019 counselor robert mueller unequivocally found the internet research agency the same oligarchy runs -- carried out an extensive social media disinformation campaign to help them candidate donald trump and to hurt hillary clinton and intelligence interfered with 2016 election by a hack and release campaign damaging the campaign. these particular findings came on the heels of the unanimous assessment, part of the united states intelligence agency that quote ordered an influence campaign in 2016 and at the presidential election closed quote. they also followed the release of a bipartisan senate intelligence committee report finding that rsia and vladimir putin engaged in and i quote aggressive multifaceted efforts to influence the u.s. presidential elections. mr. tie ev do you believe the russians and their oligarch control internet research agency interfered in the 26 election and social media disinformation campaign? do you believe that? >> congressmen my disagreement disagreement. >> ts is a basically yes or no question. either you think so or you don't and i don't have a lot o

and i felt very much the sam day when i heard that robert mueller was being appointed to the specialw to use the syste the same way he had used the civil law system to manipulate results and could easily d that as the president. we saw the use of pardons, the way that he helped his friends and hurt his foes. and i think that today is step in the right direction in terms of the rule of law, wher he is being held to account. and we will have all of th rights of a criminal defendant and that means also people should be aware it's going t take some quite some time. because part of that means h has the right to discovery, to -- motions. all of that is something tha comes with it -- for the people who were saying that this is a great day because he's been held t account, they need t understand the other part of that, which is, all of us know it's something that goes wit the rule of law. >> - >> you know, chris, i look a that same, and i listen to and the thing that jumped ou to me is the notion of status. and when i stay status, it works in very different ways he made reference to his stat

president, the documented obstruction of justice by the then-president that was documented by robert mueller in the team that i was a part of. and all of that was so anathema to what many people viewed america stood for, which is the rule of law and something that we thought we were proud of and was a beacon for the rest of the world. and so for today, seeing alvin bragg, you know, and i think it's notable, an african american d.a., has the tenacity, putting up with these kinds of attacks and just keeping his head down is, i think, a sign this country is on track, that people actually respect the rule of law and are willing to do their duty even in the face of smear campaigns and worse, including death threats. and it is worth noting that we owe a debt to people in those public positions who really are sacrificing quite a lot that they didn't sign up for to uphold the rule of law in this country. it's a shame we have gotten to this place, when other countries are ones we ask to emulate and fortunately we're in a position where now emulating other countries that have held senior political lea

your testimony here today that you disagree with the two indictments by specialthe di counsel robert mueller that definitively established that russia interfered in our twentyo sixteen election through social media disinformationci and a hao and leak operation? no, i don't disagree. mr. taibbi, do you disagree with those two indictments? >> well, i don't indictments are thing to do. >> you disagree about 40 orstomr 50 pages. d do you disagreo yoe with theu dt evidence outlined in those indictments? >> well, indictments are just charges. when asked you, do you disagreeo with the evidence included isen? those indictments? >> yes or no? i'm not on the jury of that case. i couldn't possibly say yes orth no.at. e thatk it's possibl they may have on a small scale, but certainly not to what'nos been reported, what's beenin t reported or what's been included in the indictmenthes. well, again, indictments are allegations. they're are not proof. and i understand. pretty detailed allegations in the mueller indictment. by the way, you go rea thin the indictment and then come back and tell us if you actu

i would add that if we look at robert mueller, who was special counsel in recent memory, he used his discretion. if we look at his report, there are various things that he recommends or does not recommend in his discretion. but absolutely merrick garland has to take the broader view. now as to the documents case, what keeps coming to my mind is there's a concept in football in the nfl called offsetting penalties, and that means if both the offense and the defense happened to commit penalties on the same play even if their unequal even if one of the penalties is way worse than the other. the result is it wipes out the entire play and you sort of start back where you begin. now look, we can all understand analytically. there are important differences between the trump documents case and the biden documents case, trump had more documents. trump looks like he was obstructing. biden was not. however i think you're right. i think it's going to be very difficult for america, holland and he's allowed to think about this. to justify and have public confidence in an outcome where he says, i'm

argued, different people are out to get him whether it's the media, whether it's james comey and robert mueller, whether it's the congress, and so what we have already heard and what will continue to hear. is that the investigations are yet one more way in which the establishment is out to get him and what we have seen is there are many republicans, not just the base that find this basic message appealing, and that's far there's been multiple investigations, and he remains the front runner in the republican party. we should remember that, and even this week, most republican leaders a rallying around him, so there's a way in which this will fit. his message will fit his theme and even facing indictment, even with an indictment. if that happens, it might not hurt his standing in the republican party. and while no president has been indicted before we have seen politicians of all stripes face indictments of their own. in the past, richard nixon received a pardon from gerald ford. we even had a president arrested once ulysses s. grant yes, that was a long time ago, but he was busted for speeding an

robert mueller when he was the fbi director set out deliberately to change the culture of the fbi from a law enforcement agency to an intelligence driven agency. that had bad and unintended consequences. the difference is this, in law enforcement, you spend every day consciously or unconsciously waiting for that day to come where you will raise your right hand before a judge or a jury and swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. that is quite different than an intelligence agency that operates through deceit under section, and their end product is an estimate, some would call a best guess. gases are not allowed in the courtroom. past reforms like the church and pike committees, when necessary. the subcommittee is a step in the right direction. hopefully it's work will be bipartisan. because the abuses of an intelligence driven fbi threatens the liberty of those on the left as well as those on the right. in 1978, after the church committee revelations, reforms were undertaken. the fbi and the doj enacted a series of attorney general guidelines for conducting i