you're william barr tonight. you're planning on one or two or multiple versions of different reports, mueller's report being released minus everything you want taken out of it. heading into that bold plan for tomorrow morning, you now know that at least one federal district court judge in washington, d.c. is planning on checking your work soon. and that judge is already expressing concerns in open court about how you are handling this matter and why he might need to correct for it. this was judge walton in open court yesterday afternoon. we just got the cratranscript y. ready? quote, obviously, the judge says, there is real concern whether there will be full transparency. and i hate to say it, but unfortunately the attorney general has created an environment that i think is going cause a significant portion of the american people to be concerned about whether there is transparency. and that puts the court obviously in a very difficult situation. but i have dealt with difficult situations before, and, you know, i'

put yourself in william barr's shoes right now. if you are newly appointed attorney general william barr and tonight you are planning on a big day tomorrow, you are planning on making yet another william barr public declaration of what you say mueller found and you're planning on doing that tomorrow without anybody being allowed to read what mueller found and without mueller being allowed to explain himself what he found and without mueller or anyone on his team being available to answer questions about what they found, no, you are planning on you handling all of that in your own terms and nobody being able to check you against the real record. you're william barr tonight, you're planning on one or two or multiple different versions of mueller's report being released minus everything you want taken out of it. heading into that bold plan for tomorrow morning, you now know that at least one federal district court judge in washington, d.c. is planning on checking your work soon, and that judge is already expressing concerns in open co

that's the last time william p. barr tried to issue a summary of principle conclusions to the public and congress instead of handing over an actual document. and that previous experience in u.s. history with william p. barr is part of the reason there are so many red flags flying everywhere about him refusing to release the mueller report in full to congress, about him writing his own summaries of what he says is in the mueller report instead of releasing the summaries mueller's team wrote themselves about the report. it's also the reason i think there are just generally low expectations for whatever it is going to be released from barr's office thursday morning this week a he's been involved in supervising this vague and ever shifting redaction process and appears to be reinventing on the spot once he received the mueller report and got a look at it. so we're going to speak with ryan goodman about the implications of william p. barr's past behavior here and what we're about to experience. but the fact there are such low

attorney general william barr knows that.is a case of giving him a little thing he wants while he resists his much worse demands? or does this justice department letter threatening the oscars show us there is absolutely nothing william barr won't do for donald trump. there is no order too small or petty. no order from donald trump that william barr thinks is beneath him. is that what this means? donald trump has always said he wanted roy cohn as his attorney general and he couldn't because roy cohn died in 1986 and before he died, he was convuicted of crimes and donald trump loved him because he would do anything for donald trump, anything. does he finally have his roy cohn again? is that what this letter tells us about the attorney general of the the united states? we don't know yet. but it doesn't tell us anything good or decent or honorable or professional about the attorney general of the united states. that's tonight's last word. "the 11th hour" with brian williams starts right now. >> and president trump shifts h his at

william barr neglected to say that.or those who are watching, if it is enough that the president was not indicted and carted away, then it is fine. if we expect something more from our elected officials rather than trying to obstruct justice, this is problematic. david: finally, if this is not the end, is at the beginning of the end? it appears robert mueller may testify. william barr will testify. we have a 2020 presidential election. there'll be a lot of talk. as a matter of process, to see any further prosecutions coming out of this? jeffrey: as a criminal matter i think it is over. no more indictments unless there are other investigations with u.s. attorney's office similar to the cohen case. as a political matter, this has led. it depends on how much the democrats want to hone in on it. mr. barr will testify, mr. mueller will testify. we will learn some of the facts. i get the headlines. no indictment. the facts, the first 200 pages of this report go to the fact that the russians were trying to influence our electi

saying one of the people in this tweet literally made up war stories about iraq and it wasn't william barrular want to accuse bar of misleading the public, on capitol hill next week to testify before house and senate committee. jillian: who is the bearded beard? >> who is this guy? we know attorney general rod rosenstein and william barr, but who is that guy with the big beard? angelica on twitter demands to know who is he? i am here to tell you his name is edward o'callaghan, principal associate deputy attorney general. a lot of buzz about him. this person posted a fake comment by william barr saying this is tough, give me a guy with a cool beard to stand behind me. another twitter user says that guy with the beard has germs on his face more than every dog in the mississippi. that is the first thing i thought of because of that report yesterday that men's beards have more germs and dogs. rob: women with the beard fetish must've loved him. even weirder was rosenstein standing there. he didn't blink or move. >> reminded me of chris christie standing behind the president and everyone focused

it may also be part of the heat that attorney general william barr appears to be feeling. at least as evidenced by the anonymous sources popping up in the news, bearing blind quotes about how totally unreasonable william barr's decisions have been despite visible evidence to the contrary. william barr will be testifying an open senate in the session on wednesday and then on thursday, over the weekend, i bet you dollars to donuts we'll get more blind quotes from anonymous officials talking about really, if you think about it, how reasonable william barr really has been in this whole process despite what you might have heard and actually, really, if you think about it, he's kind of a hero of the story. honestly though, given barr's performance, when it comes to handling mueller's findings thus far in this week since we've been able to see him, why is congress bothering to hear from him at all? haven't we sort of heard from william barr and got a sense from where he's come from and how he fits into this process? i'd be happy to just stick with anonymous officials describing w

but as of tonight, william barr is seeming at least as trumpian as jeff sessions if not more so. and the reviews from legal scholars are condemning. professor laurence tribe tweeted today barr has no shape. he's become a caricature of a lawyer and a miserable excuse for a public servant. a pathetic porcine puppet for a pure rile puppet. if he tweeted that after the attorney general with absolutely no justification used the word "spying" in the today's hear. spying is not a legal term. it's a hollywood term. it's a word for screen writers, not attorneys general. it's a word for wise guy no it alls and not being specially precise about their language. in this case, it's a word that the attorney general threw into the trump propaganda machine where "fox & friends" will now be saying forever that the attorney general says that the federal government was spying on the trump campaign. the attorney general was pressed on the use of that word, he admitted that he had absolutely no evidence at all to support that statement. none whatsoever. none. and that is why professor tribe said that b

that same day that william barr wins in court? no one will lose health insurance because trump will rush through a lee rao replacement that will take effect the same day? that was an offensive trumpian answer he gave. and today, it was about the wall. the attorney general of the united states once again became a trump cheerleader in a congressional hearing and this time, it was about building the wall. >> we have to stop the flow of drugs from mexico or make a much bigger dent in it. that's one of the reasons that d do think that a wall a barrier system across the southern border is an important part of that. >> every expert on the subject reports that most of the illegal drugs that come into this in country from mexico come through the legal ports of entry. they are smuggled through in trucks and other vehicles coming through the legal ports of entry but the question wasn't even about that. the question was about the opioid crisis in america. that's what the attorney general was asked about. that's why he wants a wall. his answer

under this purported reasoning from attorney general william barr. as spelled out in the "washington post," that's fine. you're good. as long as ultimately that bank robber still got caught at some point, you're good. your obstruction effort, you tried but it didn't work. which means you're fine. now, do not try this at home. this is not how the law actually works, but this is the way that william barr, or rather, people familiar with the thinking that led to the conclusions of william barr, that's how they are explaining how he arrived at this idea that president trump didn't commit the crime of obstruction of justice based on robert mueller plainly explaining exactly that the president committed the crime of obstruction of justice. so why is this in the "washington post" now? why has this purported justification that trump committed a crime here, which just appeared in the "post" and regardless of what you think about the quality of the reasoning being explained here and the quality of the lawyering that barr is trying to have ascribed to him, why

democrats piling on attorney general william barr ahead of the mueller report release. expected barr to do anything that would be respect ful to members of congress. he auditioned for this job. he was chosen to protect the president of the united states. he is basically and a lackey and sycophant for the president of the united states of america and that's all it is going to be. ed: joining us now to react is nationally syndicated radio host dana loesch. >> good morning. ed: presumably the audition is in reference to memo some months ago that william barr wrote that the president has vast executive power when it comes to these investigations which is a legitimate power to assert. to take that memo and say he is a lackey seems like a bit of a stretch? >> that is more than an stretch. that is an olympic sport that maxine waters performed there with that ridiculous rhetoric. all barr did simply refer to the authority the constitution vested in the president. democrats are losing their mind. for two years we were promised all kinds of sordid details. we were promised everyth

what did we learn from william barr we didn't already know?in: we are awaiting word from president trump later this hour. he will be in the same room as reporters when he is set to attend an event with wounded warriors, so we could be hearing first response from the president himself later this hour. the president has tweeted out, "game over," with a meme referencing the popular "game of thrones." it seems like the white house is in a celebratory mood as they .ry to turn the page on this attorney general william barr saying he himself, as well as the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein, ultimately disagreed with robert mueller on what they found. in that four-page memo, they said there was not the intent of obstruction of justice, which ultimately is why they did not decide to bring charges against the president. , but theys in recess will receive a less redacted version of the report in less than an hour. from there, attorney general william barr says he will post publicly that report from the farm of justice website -- from the departing

william barr is donald trump's re-election campaign attorney general.now, that could be just a coincidence of the calendar that william barr was made attorney general at the same time that the president started running for re-election. and will be running for re-election throughout william barr's service as attorney general. that could be a coincidence or it could be that william barr is as determined to get donald trump re-elected as president as steve bannon was determined to get donald trump elected in the first place. when you look at this week in the president's re-election campaign, no one has done more for the president's re-election campaign than william barr. he told the house committee that if donald trump and william barr are successful in destroying the affordable care act in court then the president will magically instantly on that same day replace obamacare with a new law that will instantly pass congress and take care of 20 million people who had lose health insurance if william barr successfully takes away from them in court but it will

involving william barr's inaccurate summaries of justice department material.congress was then pursuing. ryan goodman is co-editor in chief of the foreign just security.org. with us, ron klain a senior aide to vice president joe biden and president obama. he was a former chief counsel to the senate judiciary committee and chief of staff to attorney general janet reno. he knows the workings of the attorney general's office. ryan, i want to start with you. you have been reporting extensively on william barr's previous history in the justice department, republican administration. that involved a very similar situation in which he was issuing a summary version of what later turned out to be something very different from the summary. what does that tell us then about what we might expect in the difference between what has been the william barr summary of the mueller report and the next chapter, the redacted william barr version of the mueller report. >> that's right. so there's a remarkable episode that is very similar to today. 199, william barr had actually issued

william barr wasn't going to let them do that. lou: this makes you feel very authoritative holding up this break of nonsense. redacted -- it doesn't even invite curiosity pages it is an attack on a president with a specific partisan purpose and on the part of the radical dimms to unseat a duly elected president. they stole an election! midterm election. on the basis of -- this garbage and perpetuating a special counsel who found nothing, nothing! zero. >> and as you know, lou, you may recall we talked about this last week. i never thought there should have been a mueller report because we suspected, this is what the goal was peer to have the justice department read hundreds of pages, criticized the president for exercising his responsibility as president. this president is attacked in this report for defending himself. again! lou: false charges. and an absolute conspiracy to overthrow the government of the united states. >> and to criticize the justice department and the fbi for abuse of power? and the suggestion for mueller is th

>> i find william barr's behavior unconscionable.efending the president. >> then we see a redaction. i don't have x-ray vision. i can't see through black ink. >> william barr, as political operatives do come put a spin on this that was favorable to the president. rob: the mainstream media melting down over the release of the bob mueller report. jillian: can they regain the people trust? rob: visiting fellow with the independent women's form and beverly holberg. one of the biggest things, the prerelease press conference, they said william barr was talking about the president like he was his own client rather than being attorney general. >> let's not forget this is somebody the president has nominated. any president will nominate the agn this is someone that works for the bush administration. i don't think we can say he has always been in the trump camp and let's not forget the other side as well. he said from the beginning that he was going to give an unredacted version to congress and said that mueller should testify so everything we

william barr goes to capitol hill, got some blowback and gave us a lot of information.talk about how this investigation got started and what we will see in the mueller report and senator josh holly on capitol hill and what is going on with homeland security and kellyanne conway will reflect on that in san antonio to find out what is going on towards the border and devon nunez will be here, bringing in a major lawsuit. and a small office, i have a problem throwing things out. this is spring cleaning week. the last 14 hours they have been cleaning my office. you will see the transformation. is it possible to get rid of that clutter? i was getting text messages at 9:00 that they were still working on this. i've not seen it yet but i have seen the office. the way you can clean your house, the way you can clean your office, we will give you some clues and try to organize my life. it is impossible to organize my life. jillian: another person's office be worse than mine? rob: how high maintenance are you if you can't clean your own office? another diva news anchor. rob: can't

i have known william barr all the way back to the early 1990s and this was not the william barr wererelations adviser to the president or as some have said acting as defence counsel for the president. at times i thought i was listening to a rudy giuliani without a new york accent. what about this question about president trump said this in his remarks on camera in response to the report being published in which he obviously said game over, but he said no president should have too enjoyed this again. do you think there will be some relu cta nce do you think there will be some reluctance in future to appoint special prosecutions because of the way this has developed. it has had a huge distracting effect on the trump presidency. it has about you go back to nixon or to clinton, they had independent councils who were even more distracting and went right to the heart of their presidencies and of course nixon had to resign and clinton was impeached by the house but not convicted by the senate, so to say that this is unique is wrong. the difference is that both parties got disillusioned with

they have already classified william barr in some ways asa classified william barr in some ways as airm their view on that. and we will wait to see what exactly comes out when the report is published, jane, in an hour or so. but the amount of redactions will be key to what the democrats do next and bear in mind, the chair of the house judiciary committee, jerry nadler, he has that subpoena in his pocket when she can launch any time he chooses for the unredacted report. and that could end up in the courts, of course. william barr did suggest that he would be releasing more details to a bipartisan members of congress, so that they would be able to see more than we are going to get to see with the exception of grand jury evidence. william barr has been criticised for being sympathetic. a lot of critics think he has been sympathetic to the president. but what did you make of the point that he made that nobody at the white house got to see the unredacted report and that the president himself did not claim any executive privilege? how significant is that? i think the executive privilege is

, not just william barr looking at this activity. michael horwitz who is as straight and narrow is you want, former us attorney lindsey graham, i assure you is going to look at -- there's nothing wrong with asking. we giving critical powers to law enforcement, what is wrong with asking, what is the factual predicate for investigating a presidential campaign, what surveillance techniques did you use and that is before you get to the fisa process. of course you want to know if you can spy on an american or do surveillance on an american absent sufficient facts or predicate but even before that, to launch a counterintelligence investigation by somebody with a level of historic animus that peter stzrok had, wiser want to ask out of this begin? there sufficient facts i think it will be the first to tell you, he signaled that today, he's not saying spying or surveillance was inappropriate. he doesn't know that yet. what he's saying is we are going to find out and that is an imminently reasonable position. >> folks across the partisan divid

attorney general william barr has said publicly he believes the trump campaign was spied on. he doesn't know if it was legal or illegal but wants to find out. same goes for the chair of the senate judiciary committee lindsey graham and the doj inspector general michael horowitz looking into the genesis of the trump campaign being investigated including to what extent the fbi used the unverified steel dossier to surveillance of the trump campaign but we should note christopher steele is declining to meet with the inspector general saying it would be improper for former british intelligent for the doj investigation. this is the same british spy who admitted the dossier was unverified but provided to the fbi. on the 2020 democratic presidential trail collusion appears to be getting the heat but obstruction front and center. >> on the issue of obstruction of justice, from what i have read so far it seems very clear that that was the president's attempt. >> president on many occasions attempted to obstruct justice. >> carson and presidential candidate eric swalwell said this was c

was it a sound legal argument as to why william barr would make that determination? >> barr appears to have made that determination, because, he gave a brief speech about it as a prosecutor it's tear duty to make a final determination. if you read between the lines, you could see a subtle jab at robert mueller for simply amassing the facts and leaving that final duty to the attorney general to make the determination based on this collection of facts because barr views it as the obligation of a prosecutor. prosecutors he say don't amass facts and put them out there for the public to digest. prosecutors make decisions, prosecutorial decisions. >> pete williams,

rob: democrats fuming after a second hearing with william barr and what he said. latest. >> as they wrap it up.

i want to test william barr's independence and credibility.ng to give a direct accurate answer, no, this report does not exonerate the president even if it might upset the president. william barr ought to not hide behind the report speaks for itself. he is the one going behind that podium, giving us the image of transparency, he has the report not us in the public. we will be able to tell early on is this real transparency or is this just a show. >> what about number two, national security? how so? >> i would ask the president, look, as the nation's chief law enforcement officer do you have any security concerns about the contacts between donald trump and the russians? we know that robert mueller and william barr have concluded there is not sufficient evidence to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt, that is the highest legal standard we have in our system, but it does not mean that nothing happened. we know the trump power meeting happened, we know there were all these contacts. i would ask william barr as the chief law enfor

william barr is coming on may 2. so this story is far from over. the mueller report occupies the top three spots on the amazon bestseller list. so there is interest out there in what is actually in the report, but there is a lot to go and there is also, i should mention, 14 referrals that were made by the mueller team to there isisdictions, so a lot more -- and we don't know what most of that is. thet of black-out stuff in report. we only know two of the 14. michael cohen and gregory craig, who are in legal trouble. the others, we don't know. over time, we will find out. host: we learned august 14 is the week for greg craig's trial. the mueller report is available on our homepage at c-span.org. william barr will be on capitol hill and we will have live coverage of the house and senate hearings when they take place and also robert mueller. two other points. in the sunday opinion section of the washington post, "trump is lucky, putin is luckier," describing the president as a survivor. going back to the front page story of the washington post, robert

the thing about william barr. storied career, history. lots of conversation about his commitment to the institution of justice. at the same time that memo othat he wrote -- >> the unsolicited memo about the mueller investigation >> and the fact that he took what was a shockingly broad view of both executive power, some legal scholars were quite astounded by and quite an over statement. and even unhis four-page summary letter, he adds that not proving the underlying crime, in this case the conspiracy is why there can't be obstruction. >> every lawyer i've spoken to has told me that's not true. ib can obstruct a case i have nothing to do with. >> of course you can.

everybody wants to blame william barr. the democrat safety has not come out and stated enough. they want to say william barr , whyedacted and alternate does robert mueller not come out in self -- himself and state how he feels and how it was presented? host: i can only say that jerry nadler today said he would be toling for robert mueller testify in front of his committee. also attorney general barr will be testifying may 1 and may 2 on capitol hill in front of the senate judiciary committee led by lindsey graham and the house judiciary by jerrold nadler. randy is in north carolina, how are you? we are listening. caller: i have not read the report with this is a witchhunt. this president cares about this country. he has done nothing but fight for this country. they have been trying to bury since poor hilary didn't win the election. cannot handle the truth that he did not have collusion with russia. they just keep wanting to investigate and hinder. the democratic party has done nothing in the first 100 days of office except want to investigate. all they should do is use their ta

we'll keep an eye on that william barr hearing. he might not want to talk about it but i promise democrats do. it's set to begin moments from now. plus we're minutes away from another house hearing. this one i'm very focus on. it is focused specifically on hate crimes and whether or not social media companies are doing enough to reign in white nationalists propaganda online. i'll give you the answer to that. the answer is no. but up next, felicity huffman set to plead guilty with 12 other parents in the college admissions scandal. we'll tell you how much time she could face in prison for what she did. h time she could face in prison for what she did. rs. rs. but what i do count on... is boost® delicious boost® high protein nutritional drink has 20 grams of protein, along with 26 essential vitamins and minerals. boost® high protein. be up for life. -it's our confident forever plan. -welcome to our complete freedom plan. -it's all possible with a cfp professional. ♪ -find your certified financial planner™ professional at letsmakeapla

today was attorney general william barr's first public appearance since he made that very, very public, very controversial, very puzzling, declaration. first time since then. first time since he got the mueller report. first time since he's done all this stuff that he's done with the mueller report. finally, today, with him appearing in public, with him appearing in congress, we knew we would get some explanation from him as to why he declared that the president definitely didn't commit a crime. we'd finally get some explanation from him as to what basis he used to -- on what basis he concluded that the president didn't commit a crime. also presumably we'd get some explanation from him as to why he thought it was his job to proclaim that the president didn't commit any crime. at least you'd think we would have gotten that today in his first appearance since the mueller report was handed into him and he stuffed it deep into a desk drawer somewhere. you'd think we'd get answers to all of those questions, but it turns out nobody asked him at his appearance today in congress. nobody asked

as far as the mood inside, i think there is a presumption to trust william barr. he is someone who had a lot of experience and felt call today come back in this position. after this week and the use of the word spying it seemed to counter act and contradict a lot of officials who were here and open to the counter intelligence probe. they want to see an attorney general who will come and give more base for these decisions that he is making because right now that presumption of building up william barr is possibly starting to crumble. >> you see a lot of i would say optimism out of the white house. they seem to feel they have gotten ahead of it with or without the help of william barr whether based on law or politics or a combination of the two. they certainly seem very encouraged. he has been -- i don't know how you read the behavior of the last two weeks where he has been going in so many different directions. we'll talk more about immigrati immigration. he seems both emboldened and also more aggressive against his perceived opponents. >> that's right. you could a

it may be that attorney general william barr is just, you know, he is curious. he is a curious guy. he wants to ask questions. he is recently appointed. he has only been there seven weeks. you take a new job. you want to be thorough, right? i'm not suggesting any rules were violated, but spying on a political campaign, that would be a huge deal. did spying happen? ah, well, i mean, you know, did anything ever come of that whole year plus long effort by the president to say that maybe the fbi investigation into russian interference in the elections was just one big hoax? it was just made up. whatever happened to that claim. are we still trying to say that with obama tapping his wires and all that? are we still saying that? is that still the line we're working? just curious. should we chase that down? i mean, when the attorney general of the united states goes before congress and says there was spying on the trump campaign, that's not a dog whistle to the president and his allies about the thoroughly debunked conspiracy theories about robert mueller and spying and president obama havi

attorney general william barr will release the long-awaited document. the main takeaways for the market. earnings bonanza. s&p delivering 8% sales and 15% earnings growth. numbers from oil players to consumer sales. and german manufacturing pmi disappointing, not enough to counteract the gloom. david: welcome to "bloomberg daybreak." lots of earnings this morning. let's start with blackstone. two things here. assets under management came in under $512 billion, substantially more than thought. they had a big miss in distributive income, but that could be a matter of timing. you can see the stock in premarket has shot up about 3%. alix: in converting -- and converting. david: converting because of the tax code change. they reduced the corporate tax rate in means they can be included in indexes now. alix: at 8:00 a.m. we will be interviewing steve schwarzman, blackstone chairman and ceo. also take a look at philip morris. that stock down by about 8/10 of 1%. earnings came in line with estimates. revenue was a slight beat. for this guy, it is going to be wh

his words, this is a by-the-books law guy, william barr. he said let's let him follow the law. he's cool, calm and collected and doing what he can under the law. >> there's no doubt it's better than bill barr is up there than matthew whitaker. the timing was good to get bill barr in front of any committee when the mueller report came out to what ken starr's opinion of this is, a lot of people don't see ken starr as the most upstanding special prosecutor or investigator or whatever term we're going to use. >> bring to us william barr. as mitch mcconnell put it, it comes down to whether or not you trust william barr or you do not. right now do democrats have reason not to trust him? >> william barr came into this job having produced a document and an analysis of this mueller witch hunt as president trump likes to call it. calling into question the origins of this. he has an expansive view of executive privilege. then you have his record as h.w. bush as attorney general. republicans advocate for policies and a republican a.g. is not ever going to be a democrat's pick. yes, it's sad

republicans say they're ready to brief attorney general william barr about aledged misconduct during's investigation into the trump 2016 campaign. congressman devin nunes says committee republicans identified several potential violations of law. we're breaking it down for you. well, here we go, earnings season kicking off today with two big banks reporting before the bell. analysts you say we could be headed for some

washington. >>> and there is still so much to unpack from what we just heard from the attorney general william barr and some critics immediately questioning barr and whetr or not he showed enough independence from the president who appointed him. >> matthew miller served as the director of pubc affairs at the justice department when eric holder was attorney general. here is what he had to say right after the news conference. >> i really thought it was an astonishing performance by e attorney general. i've never seen a attorney general or any u.s. attorney or prosecutor give afo perance where he sounded more like the president's defense attorney. there were two things that i thought were remarkable. one this point where you raise that he said we now know that collusion didn't happen. that is not what the justice department said.ey thay say we didn't establish a crime committed but to say that it is not the way they tali aboutestigations and unusual for him to do. and the second thing is for the attorney general to com excuse the president's two-year long assault on the department of justice saying h

also today from one of the presidential candidate, representative eric swalwell, a call for william barr. >> brit: well, that's absurd. barr is not going to resign and there's no basis for them to do so. but small well is a collusion truth or, as is adam schiff. they are so invested in this theory that is now pretty much completely exploded, they seem not able to look over it. i'll think it's surprising. i don't think adam schiff is going to resign, because in some precincts to his persistence on this matter has obviously gained him ground politically. so he is still going on it. but i think it's a practical matter, harris, as a political matter, collusion is out the window. it's gone, it's dead. as for the matter of obstruction of justice, about which we are hearing from the chairman of the house judiciary committee or soon will be, that's another matter entirely. as you know, the mueller team did not reach a firm conclusion on that. that was left to barr and his associates. there are elements here in the report that will give it jerry nadler and others something to chew over. i think t

the weird vagueness with which william barr has been describing mueller's findings came to sort of its absurd apex on friday night when barr released yet another statement, a third statement in a week about mueller's findings. in that third friday night letter, barr oddly insisted that nothing he had said about mueller's findings thus far should be described as a summary of mueller's findings. he wants it to be known that he is definitely not summarizing what mueller said. although in plain english, it is hard to understand what exactly he's been saying about mueller's report when he has put out what appeared to be a summary of mueller's principle conclusions. in any case, the continued effort by attorney general william barr to hold back the mueller report itself is running into stiff resistance. six committee chairmen in the house of representatives set tomorrow, tuesday, as the deadline for barr to hand over an unredacted copy of mueller's report to congress. the attorney general does not seem intended to meet that deadline, but we shall see. if he misses the deadline, jerry nadler

. >> i want to ask you about william barr. because so far all we know about this report, it would allow the president to brand total and complete exoneration was the barr summary report. rachel maddow covered this last night and we're getting to it after her, of course. on friday the 13th, october 1989, the same day as black friday market crash, news leaked of a memo by william barr. members of the congress asked to see the full legal opinion, he refused but said he would provide an account that summarized the principle conclusions. when the opinion was made public it was clear that barr's summary failed to close the opinion's principle conclusions. are we see ago replay of that? >> we are. now we know that barr has a 30-year track record with a 19-page memo recently reinforcing that. and i think it raises some serious questions about whether barr can be an effective arby or the arbitor of what appears. i think we'll end up seeing the report. >> there's a legal analysis here, that it doesn't lend itself to a cliff notes version

lawyers have also added to questions about the propriety of the decisions by the attorney general, william barre he received the special counsel's findings late last month. >> yeah, this is a major question that has been hanging over bill barr for days now. last week when he was testifying on the hill, he refused to answer a questions about whether or not he was going to provide the white house with the findings ahead of time. now we know according to "the new york times" that apparently he did or people are the the justice department did, giving the white house a potential significant heads up to prepare for this, to potentially frame and spin what's in the report before congress gets to see it. and it feeds into the questions that democrats have had on the hill, the concerns they've had, that barr is basically blocking and tackling for president trump. they've been concerned from the get go that as a political appointee who essentially got the job by having skepticism about the point of the mueller probe, particularly as it goes to obstruction, that barr is basically in this job to help prote