>>> WELCOME BACK. MICHAELEN OF AXIOS WROTE
YESTERDAY THAT THERE ARE TWO
KINDS OF, QUOTE, COLLUSION
DELUSION.
DELUSION. ONE, THE BELIEF AMONG PRESIDENT
TRUMPS MOST ARDENT SUPPORTERS.
THE NO COLLUSION INDICTMENTS
MEANS THAT THE WITCH HUNTS HAVE
BEEN VINDICATED AND IN A SECOND
HE WROTE THE BITTER REALITY THAT
THIS PROBE HAS SPAWNED MANY
OTHERS STRETCHING FAR BEYOND
RUSSIA.
RUSSIA.
ITS DELUSIONAL TO THINK IT SIMPLY ENDS WITH NO COLLUSION.
JOINING ME TO LOOK AT SOME OF
THE LEGAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE
MUELLER REPORT IS ARI MELBER AND
HOST OF THE BEAT AND FORMER FBI
OFFICIAL CHUCK ROSENBERG.
>> I WANT TO START WITH YOU.
THE NO NEW INDICTMENTS WITH THE
CONCLUSION OF THE MUELLER REPORT
WAS GREETED AS A MOMENT OF VINDICATION BY THE PRESIDENTS
MOST ARDENT SUPPORTERS.
WHY SHOULDNT THEY FEEL GOOD, AT
LEAST, ABOUT THAT FACT? ?EAST, ABOUT THAT FACT?
?
>> THEY CAN FEEL SOMEWHAT GOOD BECAUSE IT SHOWS THAT BOB GOOD
BECAUSE IT SHOWS THAT BOB MUELLER HAS NOT FOUND A
CHARGEABLE ELECTION CONSPIRACY. NOT AGAINST DONALD TRUMP AND THE
PEOPLE AROUND HIM SO THAT TELLS
YOU SOMETHING.
YOU SOMETHING.
THE REASON WHY PRESIDENT TRUMP
HAS REMAINED QUIET AND MOST
PEOPLE ARE STILL WAITING IS THE
REPORT CAN ULTIMATELY SURFACE A LOT OF OTHER BAD MATERIAL ABOUT
POOR JUDGMENTS OR EVEN ATTEMPTED
CRIMES WITHOUT CHARGING THEM.
>> CHUCK ROSENBERG, PRINCIPAL
CONCLUSIONS AND YOUVE WORKED IN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT.ORKED IN
THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. YOU KNOW HOW DIFFERENT PEOPLE
INTERPRET DIFFERENT PHRASES. WHATS YOUR SENSE OF WHAT BILL
BARR MEANS BY THAT?
>> HE PROMISED IT QUICKLY, CHUCK AND HE STRIKES ME THAT IT WOULDK
AND HE STRIKES ME THAT IT WOULD BE REASONABLY HIGH LEVEL MEANING
ALL OF THE STUFF WE WANT TO SEE
IN THE REPORT, ALL OF THE
INTERESTING DETAILS AND PROBABLY NOT.RESTING DETAILS AND PROBABLY
NOT.
>> YOU EXPECT A VERY NARROW
SCOPE HERE.
REASONABLY NARROW BECAUSE HE
PROMISED IT SO QUICKLY AND THERE
IS A LOT TO WORK THROUGH BEFORE
YOU CAN DECIDE WHETHER ALL OF THE OTHER STUFF COULD BE PUBLIC.
>> ITS COLLUSION VERSUS
OBSTRUCTION AND CAN YOU COME TO
A COLLUSION CONCLUSION?
APOLOGIES FOR THAT ILLITERATION
IF OBSTRUCTION TOOK PLACE, ARI?
>> YOU DEFINITELY CAN SHED MORE
LIGHT ON WHAT WERE THE REASONS
THAT DONALD TRUMP SEEMED TO
REPEATEDLY INTERFERE WITH THESE
PROBES, INSTRUCT PEOPLE TO
MISLEAD OR LIE, WAS THERE SOMETHING UNDERLYING?HERE
SOMETHING UNDERLYING? AND THE THEORY HAD BEEN THAT
MIGHT BE THE COLLUSION. IT MIGHT BE OTHER RELATED
PROBLEMS THAT NATIONAL SECURITY
OFFICIALS CARES ABOUT OR THE
CONGRESS CARES ABOUT THAT ARE
NOT WHAT HAS BEEN CALLED COLLUSION.AS BEEN CALLED
COLLUSION.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF SOMEBODY HIGH ON THE GOVERNMENT OWES A FOREIGN ON
THE GOVERNMENT OWES A FOREIGN POWER A LOT OF MONEY AND THAT
HAS CORRUPTED FOREIGN POLICY THATS A BIG DEAL, BUT THATCY
THATS A BIG DEAL, BUT THAT MIGHT NOT BE THE THING A SPECIAL
COUNSEL CHARGES.
>> WE HAVE AN ARRAY OF ISSUES IN PUBLIC THAT WEVE COVERED THAT IN
PUBLIC THAT WEVE COVERED THAT HAVE SOME PEOPLE BELIEVING THAT
AN OBSTRUCTION -- YOU HAVE THE
SUGGESTION OF COMEY TO DROP THE
FLYNN PROBE.
YOU HAVE THE FIRING OF COMEY
WHEN HE CITED THE RUSSIA THING,
CALLING FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
TO FIRE MUELLER, DANGLING THE
POSSIBILITY OF PARDONS AND THIS
IS THE PUBLIC RECORD.
DO YOU EXPECT MUELLER, IF -- DO
YOU EXPECT HIM TO BE SO FOCUSED
ON HIS CHARGE THAT HE LISTS THE
EVIDENCE WITHOUT MAKING A CONCLUSION?THOUT MAKING A
CONCLUSION?
MEANING HELL LIST ALL OF THE
OBSTRUCTION EVIDENCE AND
BASICALLY, CHUCK ROSENBERG, ITS
UP TO YOU TO CONCLUDE WHETHER THATS OBSTRUCTION.UDE WHETHER
THATS OBSTRUCTION.
>> THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
WHAT YOU FIND AND TO DESCRIBE. I WORKED FOR THE MAN.DESCRIBE.
I WORKED FOR THE MAN. I EXPECT HIM TO DESCRIBE IT AND
NOT TO CHARACTERIZE IT SO IT WILL BE FOR US AND FOR CONGRESS
AND JOURNALISTS TO DECIDE
WHETHER WHAT MUELLER HAS FOUND
AMOUNTS TO OBSTRUCTION.
HE WILL DESCRIBE IT.
HE WILL LAY OUT THE EVIDENCE.
HE WILL GIVE YOU AN EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATION.E YOU AN EVIDENTIARY
FOUNDATION.
I BELIEVE IT WILL BE FOR OTHERS
TO CHARACTERIZE.
>> THAT LEADS TO THE POLITICAL
CHALLENGE, I THINK, FOR THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AND
THATS WHY YOU HEARD HESITANCE.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
ULTIMATELY THE MATERIALS THAT
COME FROM BOB MUELLER TO THE CONGRESS, WHETHER THAT IS SOONER
OR LATER, ARE GOING TO PUT
FORWARD QUESTIONS OF WHETHER
THIS PRESIDENT ABUSED HIS POWER
IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE CONGRESS
WANTS TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT,
AND THATS SIGNIFICANT EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF COLLUSIONEN IN
THE ABSENCE OF COLLUSION INDICTMENT.
INDICTMENT.
SO YOU HAVE BOTH THINGS HAPPENING, CHUCK.THINGS
HAPPENING, CHUCK.
ON THE ONE HAND, PEOPLE WHO HAD LONG ASSUMED OR HOPED THAT THIS
PRESIDENT CLEARLY AND EDGITY
LEGITIMATELY OBTAINED THE
PRESIDENCY AND THERES NO
CHARGEABLE COLLUSION AND THE
WHITE HOUSE WOULD HAVE TO
CONSIDER THE FACTS ABOUT
POTENTIAL OBSTRUCTION.
>> LET ME GET TO EXECUTIVE
PRIVILEGE HERE BECAUSE THIS TO
ME IS THIS ROBERT HOLE.
HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT TO ASSERT
ABOUT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE WITHOUT READING THE REPORT.
>> WHO READS IT?
>> THERES THIS ODD TENSION HERE?ERES THIS ODD TENSION
HERE?
>> THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IS
PART OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH.
THE PRESIDENT RUNS THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH.SIDENT RUNS THE EXECUTIVE
BRANCH.
>> THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
UNITED STATES REPORTS TO THE
PRESIDENT.
IF THERES STUFF IN THAT REPORT
AND PUT ASIDE CLASSIFIED
INFORMATION AND GRAND JURY
INFORMATION AND ALL THOSE OTHER
CATEGORIES.
IF THERES STUFF IN THAT REPORT OVER WHICH EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE
CAN BE GENUINELY AND
LEGITIMATELY ASSERTED SOMEONE
WILL HAVE TO SEE IT BEFORE THEY
CAN MAKE THE ASSERTION.
I ASSUME WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL
WILL GO THROUGH THE REPORT AND
SEE WHETHER OR NOT AN ASSERTION
IS VALID.
REMEMBER, PRIVILEGES ARE
QUALIFIED AND THEYVE BEEN
OVERCOME IN THE PAST AND IT MAY
BE OVERCOME HERE.
>> GERALD NADLER SEEMS TO THINK THAT THE WHITE HOUSE HAS NO CASE
HERE.
HERE.
DO YOU THINK THEY HAVE A CASE?
>> ITS A VERY HARD ARGUMENT TO MAKE THAT BOB MUELLER GOT THINGS
FROM PEOPLE THROUGH A LAWFUL
PROCESS.
>> VOLUNTARILY, THOUGH, AND THE WHITE HOUSES LAWYERS HAD ALWAYS
SAID THEY RESERVE THE RIGHT.
>> THEY SAID THEY RESERVE THE
RIGHT AND THIS SAY LAWFULIS A LA
PROCESS AND NO JUDGE REJECTED
THE TOOLS AND SOMETHING VERY SPECIAL THAT DONALD TRUMP PUT IN
HIS OWN WRITTEN ANSWERS SUBJECT
TO HIS OWN QUALIFIED STATEMENT
THAT HE LATER WANTED TO REVOKE
IT.
ITS HARD TO SEE THE BULLK OF
THIS BEING SUBJECT TO PRIVILEGE.
>> YOU HAVE A WAY OF REMINDING
US, WHAT IS IT ABOUT THE MUELLER
REPORT THAT IS IMPORTANT TO
PEOPLE THAT WERE NOT SEDUCING. DISCUSSING. WERE NOT SEDUCING.
DISCUSSING.
>> ITS A COUNTERINTELLIGENCE INVESTIGATION.ERINTELLIGENCE
INVESTIGATION.
WHAT DID OUR ADVERSARY RUSSIA DO
TO US IN THE 2016 ELECTION AND
WHAT DO THEY HOPE TO US DO DOWN
THE ROAD?
>> IS THAT WRAPPED UP?
DOES THAT MEAN ITS ALSO WRAPPED UP, TOO, THE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
INVESTIGATION?
INVESTIGATION?
>> I WOULD BE SURPRISED IF THAT
WAS WRAPPED UP AND HERES WHY.
THIS IS AN ONGOING STRUGGLE
BETWEEN RUSSIA AND WESTERN
DEMOCRACIES.
THEY DIDNT STOP DOING WHAT THEY
DO WHEN BOB MUELLER FINISHED HIS
REPORT AND WHETHER ITS MUELLER
OR THE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE OF THE FBI AND THIS IS A SERIOUS
ONGOING CONCERN.
ONGOING CONCERN.
>> BUT AT SOME POINT THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT HAS TO BE A PART OF ENDING THE CLOUD OVER THERT OF
ENDING THE CLOUD OVER THE PRESIDENCY AND LETTING THE
CONGRESS AND ANYONE ELSE MAKE