>>> BOMBSHELL. LET’S PLAY "HARDBALL."
>>> GOOD EVENING, I’M CHRIS
MATTHEWS IN WASHINGTON.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S LETTER ON
THE ROBERT MUELLER REPORT STIRS
THE COUNTRY.
THE COUNTRY. IT SAYS MUELLER CLEARED TRUMP
AND HIS PEOPLE, INCLUDING HIS
CHILDREN, ON THE RUSSIAN FRONT.
BARR QUOTES FROM MUELLER’S
REPORT THAT THE INVESTIGATION,
QUOTE, DID NOT ESTABLISH THAT
MEMBERS OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN
CONSPIRED OR COORDINATED WITH
THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT IN ITS
ELECTION INTERFERENCE
ELECTION INTERFERENCE ACTIVITIES.
ACTIVITIES. THAT’S THE BOX OFFICE NEWS OF
THE WEEKEND BECAUSE IF MUELLER
HAD FOUND EVIDENCE OF A CRIME
THERE, THE CALLS FOR IMPEACHMENT
WOULD HAVE BEEN RESOUNDING AND
COULD EVEN HAVE REACHED
REPUBLICANS BUT HE DIDN’T.
AS A CONSEQUENCE, REPUBLICANS
ARE EVEN LESS LIKELY TO BACK
IMPEACHMENT AND CERTAINLY NOT
CONVICTION AND REMOVAL FROM
OFFICE BUT NOW COMES THE BIG
STICKLER, OBSTRUCTION OF
JUSTICE.
JUSTICE. ACCORDING TO BARR’S LETTER
RELEASED TO CONGRESS LATE
YESTERDAY, MUELLER DID NOT DRAW
ANY CONCLUSION AS TO WHETHER
TRUMP HAD COMMITTED A CRIME
HERE.
HERE. WHAT BARR THEN DID, QUOTE, THE
EVIDENCE IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO
ESTABLISH THAT THE PRESIDENT
COMMITTED AN OBSTRUCTION OF
JUSTICE OFFENSE.
JUSTICE OFFENSE. WELL, THAT’S BECAUSE ACCORDING
TO BARR THE REPORT IDENTIFIES NO
ACTIONS THAT WERE DONE WITH
CORRUPT INTENT.
CORRUPT INTENT. IN OTHER WORDS, BARR REVIEWED
MUELLER’S TWO YEAR INVESTIGATION
OVER THE COURSE OF TWO DAYS AND
RULED THAT THE PRESIDENT HAD NOT
OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE.
OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE. REACTING TO THAT NEWS YESTERDAY
THE PRESIDENT WAS QUICK TO CLAIM
EXONERATION, OF COURSE, AND THEN
ATTACK THE INVESTIGATION ITSELF.
>> IT WAS A COMPLETE AND TOTAL
EXONERATION.
EXONERATION. IT’S A SHAME THAT OUR COUNTRY
HAD TO GO THROUGH THIS.
TO BE HONEST, IT’S A SHAME THAT
YOUR PRESIDENT HAS HAD TO GO
THROUGH THIS FOR BEFORE I EVEN
GOT ELECTED IT BEGAN.
AND IT BEGAN ILLEGALLY, AND
HOPEFULLY SOMEBODY’S GOING TO
LOOK AT THE OTHER SIDE.
THIS WAS AN ILLEGAL TAKEDOWN
THAT FAILED.
THAT FAILED. >> WELL, THE PRESIDENT’S CLAIM
OF EXONERATION, HOWEVER, IS AT
ODDS WITH MUELLER’S
CHARACTERIZATION ON FINDINGS OF
POSSIBLE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.
THE SPECIAL COUNSEL SPECIFICALLY
SAID, WHILE THIS REPORT DOES NOT
CONCLUDE THAT THE PRESIDENT
COMMITTED A CRIME, IT ALSO DOES
NOT EXONERATE HIM.
ALL THIS HAS INTENSIFIED CALLS
TO RELEASE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S
FULL REPORT AS WELL AS THE
UNDERLYING EVIDENCE HE
COLLECTED.
COLLECTED. I’M JOINED BY SHANNON PETTY
PEACE.
PEACE. CAROLINE FREDERICK SON,
PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN
CONSTITUTION SOCIETY.
CONSTITUTION SOCIETY. MIMI ROCKWELL.
MIMI ROCKWELL. THANK YOU ALL FOR JOINING US.
I WANT TO START WITH SHANNON.
WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THE POLITICAL, LEGAL,
CONSTITUTIONAL REALITY WE FACED
FIVE MINUTES TO 5 LAST FRIDAY
AND NOW?
AND NOW? WHAT’S BIG AND CHANGE IN THE
COSMOS?
COSMOS? >> POLITICALLY I DON’T KNOW IF
MUCH HAS CHANGED.
I’VE BEEN TALKING TO A LOT OF
PEOPLE ABOUT THIS.
I KNOW DEMOCRATS REALLY HITCHED
THEIR WAGON TO THIS ARGUMENT,
BUT THAT’S NOT WHAT VOTERS CARED
ABOUT.
ABOUT. THEY CARED ABOUT ECONOMY AND
HEALTH CARE.
HEALTH CARE. LEGALLY I DON’T THINK THE
PRESIDENT IS IN ANY MORE LEGAL
JEOPARDY THAN HE WAS BEFORE
THIS.
THIS. THERE IS THIS OPENING FOR
DEMOCRATS THAT YOU POINTED OUT
WITH MUELLER SAYING THAT HE IS
NOT CHARGING HIM WITH A CRIME,
HE IS NOT EXONERATING HIM.
THAT GIVES DEMOCRATS AN OPENING
TO PURSUE THIS AND TO CALL FOR
THE FULL REPORT TO BE RELEASED.
I THINK THAT IS GOING TO BE
DIFFICULT FOR BARR TO DO BECAUSE
SO MUCH OF WHAT BARR COLLECTED
WAS GRAND JURY TESTIMONY,
CLASSIFIED INFORMATION OR THINGS
COVERED BY EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE,
BUT IF THE DEMOCRATS WANT BE TO
WAGE THAT FIGHT, THEY COULD DO
SO.
SO. THAT COULD BE A COURT BATTLE
THAT COULD PLAY OUT FOR YEARS
JUST LIKE THESE OTHER BATTLES OF
RELEASING DOCUMENTS HAVE PLAYED
OUT.
OUT. I DON’T KNOW IF THAT’S A PATH
THE DEMOCRATS WANT TO GO DOWN.
I THINK SOME WILL PURSUE IT BUT
I THINK YOU’RE GOING TO SEE THEM
SHIFT.
SHIFT. >> I’M INTERESTED IN WHETHER THE
PRESIDENT COMMITTED A CRIME OR
NOT.
NOT. LET ME GET BACK TO MIMI.
EVERY CRIME SHOW I WATCH, MY
FAVORITE WAS "THE GOOD WIFE" FOR
YEARS.
YEARS. THERE’S SOMETHING I SAW IN THE
FACE OF THE REALITY WHICH IS
PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION.
PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION. PROSECUTORS GET TO DECIDE WHAT
TO DO, WHETHER TO PROSECUTOR
NOT.
NOT. WHY DID ROBERT MUELLER NOT
DECIDE?
DECIDE? WHY DID HE PLAY PUNCH’S PILOT
HERE?
HERE? WHY DID HE PASS THE BUCK TO BARR
WHO HE KNEW WAS A REPUBLICAN WHO
HAD WRITTEN FAVORABLY OF THE
PRESIDENT’S POSITION ON
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, PASSED
IT OVER TO HIM AND DIDN’T USE
THE TWO-YEAR INVESTIGATION TO
MAKE UP HIS MIND?
DID THE PRESIDENT OR NOT
OBSTRUCT JUSTICE?
OBSTRUCT JUSTICE? WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE QUESTION?
AND WHERE’S THE ANSWER?
>> WELL, CHRIS, I DON’T KNOW
THAT MUELLER DID PASS THE BUCK
TO BARR.
TO BARR. I MEAN, LOOK, WE’RE RECREATING
SOMETHING HERE WITHOUT KNOWING,
YOU KNOW, ALL OF THE FACTS AND,
AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT A
RELEASE OF THE REPORT MIGHT TELL
US, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WHAT
MUELLER -- MUELLER IS NOT -- HE
SPENT DECADES MAKING HARD
DECISIONS IN HIS CAREER.
I DO NOT VIEW HIM AS SOMEONE WHO
WOULD SHY AWAY FROM A DECISION
JUST BECAUSE IT’S HARD FOR NO
GOOD REASON.
GOOD REASON. IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE HE CAME UP
WITH FACTS THAT WERE PROBLEMATIC
FOR TRUMP THAT POINTED TOWARDS
OBSTRUCTION BUT AS BARR QUOTES
MUELLER AS SAYING, THERE WERE,
QUOTE, DIFFICULT QUESTIONS OF
LAW AND FACT AND MUELLER FELT
THAT GIVEN THAT THE PRESIDENT
WAS -- COULD NOT UNDER
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE POLICY BE
INDICTED, IT WAS FOR CONGRESS TO
RESOLVE THOSE QUESTIONS.
>> HE DOESN’T SAY THAT.
I DON’T SEE THAT.
I DON’T SEE THAT IN THE LETTER
FROM BARR.
FROM BARR. WHERE DID YOU KNOW THAT HE WAS
THINKING THAT THE PRESIDENT
COULDN’T BE INDICTED?
WHERE ARE YOU GETTING THAT FROM
IN THIS REPORT?
I HAVEN’T SEEN IT YET.
>> I’M SAYING THAT THAT COULD BE
ONE OF THE DIFFICULT QUESTIONS
OF LAW THAT MUELLER WAS TRYING
TO RESOLVE, AND I THINK MUELLER
WAS TRYING TO PASS THIS OVER TO
CONGRESS AND BAR SWOOPED IN AND
TOOK IT.
TOOK IT. >> WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL TO
KNOW THAT THAT WAS HIS REASON
BECAUSE WHAT WE’RE GETTING HERE
IS DIFFICULT ISSUES.
WE’RE GETTING QUESTIONS, AND IF
HE HAD JUST SAID I CAN’T RULE
OUT AN INDICTMENT BECAUSE WE’RE
NOT SUPPOSED TO INDICT.
THAT WOULD HAVE SAVED US A LOT
OF SPECULATION HERE.
MY QUESTION IS WHY DID HE TURN
IT OVER TO A GUY WHO HE KNEW WAS
PRO TRUMP?
PRO TRUMP? >> WELL, I GUESS WHAT I’M SAYING
IS I DON’T KNOW THAT THAT WAS
MUELLER’S INTENTION.
MUELLER’S INTENTION. TO QUOTE MY FORMER BOSS, PETE
BERRARA, I THINK MUELLER WAS
PUNTING THE FOOTBALL TO CONGRESS
AND BARR SWOOPED IN AND
INTERCEPTED IT AND TOOK IT OUT
TO THE BLEACHERS.
>> OKAY.
>> OKAY. THAT’S A NICE THOUGHT.
I WANT TO GO TO CAROLINE.
I HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR YOUR
JUDGMENT.
JUDGMENT. I WANT OTHER THOUGHTS HERE.
CAROLINE, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT
THE CHAIN OF CUSTODY OF THE
REPORT WENT RIGHT TO BARR SO
WHATEVER HIS INTENTIONS WERE, HE
WAS TURNING OVER THE AUTHORITY
TO DO WHAT HE WANTED WITH THAT
REPORT TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S
POSITION WAS PRETTY DAMN CLEAR
GOING INTO THIS, THAT HE WAS PRO
TRUMP.
TRUMP. THEN MUELLER GETS WHAT HE -- HE
GAVE HIM THE HOT POTATO.
HE TOOK THE HOT POTATO.
IN 24/48 HOURS HE DECIDED TO
RULE ON THE EVIDENCE OF TWO
YEARS.
YEARS. HE JUST DID IT.
HE HAD ROB ROSENSTEIN HELPING
HIM.
HIM. >> RIGHT.
>> RIGHT. I THINK IT’S HIGHLY PROBLEMATIC.
THIS IS AN ATTORNEY GENERAL WHO
AUDITIONED FOR THIS JOB BY
WRITING A LETTER TO THE
PRESIDENT THAT SAID, I DON’T
THINK A PRESIDENT CAN COMMIT
OBSTRUCTION.
OBSTRUCTION. SO RIGHT OFF YOU HAVE TO WONDER
ABOUT --
ABOUT -- >> HE TURNS OVER THE REPORT TO A
GUY HE KNEW DIDN’T BELIEVE THE
PRESIDENT COULD BE GUILTY.
>> MUELLER -- WE DON’T KNOW WHAT
MUELLER -- THERE WASN’T REALLY A
CLEAR ALTERNATIVE FOR HIM.
>> HE COULD HAVE MADE A
DECISION.
DECISION. >> CERTAINLY, BUT I THINK WHAT
MIMI SAID IS MOST LIKELY
CORRECT, THAT HE, YOU KNOW, IS
GUIDED BY THIS JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT POLICY.
DEPARTMENT POLICY. >> WE DON’T KNOW THIS.
>> WE DON’T.
>> AND HE DIDN’T SAY IT.
>> BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS
THE FACT THAT WE DON’T KNOW IT
IS WHY WE NEED TO SEE THE REPORT
AND WHY MUELLER AND BARR SHOULD
HAVE TO GO UP TO CONGRESS AND
TESTIFY.
TESTIFY. I HAVE TO SAY, I DISAGREE.
WE DON’T KNOW, AGAIN, THAT MOST
OF WHAT MUELLER’S COLLECTED
IS -- CAN’T BE TURNED OVER TO
CONGRESS BECAUSE IT’S GRAND
JURY.
JURY. I MEAN, CONGRESS ACTUALLY HAS A
RIGHT TO SEE GRAND JURY MATERIAL
WHEN IT’S RELATED TO --
>> I WANT TO GO BACK TO MIMI ON
THIS ONE MORE TIME PAST YOU.
IT SEEMS TO ME THE REPORT THAT
WE GOT, THE PIECES OF IT WE GOT
THANKS TO BAR BASICALLY SAID I’M
NOT EXONERATING HIM, I’M NOT
INDICTING HIM.
INDICTING HIM. WHY WOULD HE GO THROUGH ALL OF
THAT IF THE REASON EITHER ONE OF
THOSE WERE IRRELEVANT WAS
BECAUSE HE COULDN’T INDICT THE
PRESIDENT TO BEGIN WITH?
WHY WOULD HE TALK ABOUT WEIGHING
THE EVIDENCE IF IT DIDN’T MATTER
HOW HE WEIGHED IT BECAUSE
ACCORDING TO YOUR REFERENCE HE
COULDN’T INDICT?
COULDN’T INDICT? >> AGAIN, YOU’RE RIGHT.
WE DON’T KNOW THAT WAS THE ONLY
BASIS.
BASIS. I THINK THAT THE OLC POLICY
COULD BE CHANGED.
THERE’S NO QUESTION THAT IT
COULD BE CHANGED, BUT IT COULD
BE THAT THE FACTS DID NOT CRY
OUT FOR THAT, RIGHT?
YOU HAVE TO TAKE THE POLICY IN
COMBINATION WITH THE FACTS.
I’M NOT SAYING THAT MUELLER DID
THE RIGHT THING OR DIDN’T DO THE
RIGHT THING.
RIGHT THING. I DON’T KNOW ENOUGH TO PASS
JUDGMENT ON SOMEONE LIKE BOB
MUELLER RIGHT NOW SITTING HERE.
I CAN TELL FROM BARR’S LETTER
THAT IT SEEMS TO ME, THE
IMPRESSION I’M LEFT WITH IS THAT
HE SAYS MUELLER DIDN’T DECIDE
THIS.
THIS. HERE, I’M GOING TO -- IT’S LEFT
TO ME TO DECIDE.
HE INSERTS HIMSELF.
I DON’T KNOW WHAT GIVES HIM THE
AUTHORITY TO DO THAT.
>> I AGREE.
>> I DON’T THINK IT WAS
APPROPRIATE, AND I THINK MOST OF
ALL, RELEASING THIS LETTER WITH
THIS PICK AND CHOOSE QUOTE
PARTIAL SENTENCES FROM BOB
MUELLER IS JUST VERY UNHELPFUL
AND QUITE PREJUDICIAL BECAUSE