Rep. Sheldon Whitehouse (D) Rhode Island Was Interviewed About A Bipartisan Vote To Release The Whole Mueller Report; Democrats Turn Their Focus To A.G. Barr; Leave The Dead Man Alone; Pelosi Tells Leadership Team To Focus On Their Agenda, Not Mueller
DON LEMON, CNN HOST: This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon. President Trump declaring victory tonight after the attorney general, Attorney General Bill Barr's letter summarizing the Mueller report stated that the investigation did not establish that Trump or his campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government. Mueller did not reach a conclusion on obstruction. Barr quotes him saying, "While this report does not conclude that president that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." Here's what the president's attorney Jay Sekulow just said to Chris about that.</s>JAY SEKULOW, MEMBER, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S LEGAL TEAM: Does a prosecutor exonerate?</s>CHRIS CUOMO, CNN HOST: No.</s>SEKULOW: I don't even know why the word --</s>CUOMO: I don't know why it's in there either.</s>SEKULOW: He said, this part we do know, that it raised difficult questions of law and fact.</s>CUOM: Yes. That's why we had him in the chart.</s>SEKULOW: You're an attorney. You prosecuted cases. Here's the problem. When you have difficult questions of law and difficult facts, guess what you don't do.</s>CUOMO: Prosecute.</s>SEKULOW: Right.</s>LEMON: Well, the White House still has not received the full Mueller report. But the president's other attorney Rudy Giuliani says the public should see it.</s>RUDY GIULIANI, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ATTORNEY: I would like to see every single thing come out because I believe that every single thing can be rebutted. I think this obstruction theory is garbage.</s>LEMON: Well, I'm with Rudy Giuliani on that one, on one thing. We should all see Mueller full report. Because what we have now is just the attorney general's presentation of the report, which leaves many questions quite frankly unanswered. But the Democrats on the campaign trail likely won't be talking about Russia. They'll be talking about this breaking news. Tonight, the Trump administration is telling a federal appeals court that the entire Affordable Care Act should be struck down. This is a major reversal from the Justice Department that could impact millions of Americans. We'll have more on that just a little bit later on in the show. But let's discuss now much of this with Juliette Kayyem, Philip Mudd, and Renato Mariotti. Good to have all of you on. Thank you so much. Phil, give me your reaction to what you just heard from the president's attorneys.</s>PHILIP MUDD, CNN COUNTERTERRORISM ANALYST: I look at this and I say I don't understand why we set the bar like this, Don. I mean, there's a question about law. I don't think that the special counsel had a question about the facts in the case, that is, Robert Mueller. I served four and a half years with him. I suspect he looked at the facts on obstruction and said I could determine whether or not to bring a charge. I think instead he said there are bigger issues to play here in terms of who can bring a charge against the president. I think he's punting it not because of the facts but because of the process. But the bigger question we should spend just a moment on is the White House saying we succeeded here. I mean, we succeeded, this is a victory when you have to go to fourth grade civics class and say success in America is a kid saying I got a d, mom, and I didn't get an f. I mean, your personal attorney, your national security adviser, the guy who led your campaign, the deputy in your campaign all lied. You lied on Air Force One. And we're supposed to walk away saying this is a victory for America, this judgment? How about occasionally we say what do we tell a fourth-grader? That this is what we want you to do in school? That lying is OK unless it passes a line to say you can be charged with a violation of the law? I don't get it, Don.</s>LEMON: Renato, when you carefully look at the attorney general's letter, it's important to remember that this is his interpretation of the Mueller report. Not Mueller's. What issues does that raise to you?</s>RENATO MARIOTTI, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I think the biggest concern I have is that he took it upon himself to reach his own conclusion about obstruction of justice. Mueller spent almost two years looking at this. He interviewed 500 witnesses, issued over 2,600 subpoenas, and for whatever reason he decided that it was better for him not to reach a conclusion on that. He wanted to leave that to the American people. It's very bizarre that Barr in a short period of time without looking at the underlying evidence reached a conclusion. It strikes me as a major lack of judgment. And it suggests --</s>LEMON: But they --</s>MARIOTTI: -- that he already admits there's not --</s>LEMON: But they were notified about three weeks before, at least Barr was, and they're saying at that time White House and the president didn't know about it, but that the Mueller team notified them that they wouldn't be making any sort of decision on that charge.</s>MARIOTTI: Yes.</s>LEMON: On obstruction.</s>MARIOTTI: Yes. And yet when you read the letter, Don, what Barr says is that he talked to certain officials at the Justice Department and he read the report. He doesn't talk about going to the underlying evidence, looking at the testimony that was given, for example, reading the underlying reports that the FBI generated. You know, that, to me if you're grappling with a difficult issue like that you want to get into the evidence. And frankly, you know, Barr should have known that as the guy who wrote that 19-page single-spaced memo expressing his views on obstruction before he became attorney general, no one would accept his judgment on its face about obstruction. He should have had the humility to do what Robert Mueller was not willing to do, which is punt that to the American people.</s>LEMON: OK. So, Juliette, listen, it's a four-page letter. In this four-page letter Barr uses very few quotes from Robert Mueller actually. How do you think this letter would have been received if it only used verbatim quotes from the report?</s>JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Much better. I'm sort of surprised at how politically poorly I think in some ways Barr has done this. If the -- the headline would have been that the president did not collude with the Russians whether we got the whole report or not. And so now the debate has shifted from sort of that seemingly good news, and I agree with Phil, the bar is really low, but the seemingly good news, to really a question of access to the report, which we -- if we got it on Sunday night, I don't think the headline would be very different, right? I'm a little bit worried, just picking up on what both of them said, that we're getting really focused on the obstruction of justice decision by Barr. We already know significant stuff coming out of this report that Barr actually admits including the Russian attempts to -- or not attempts, Russian influence in the campaign that aided Trump. And I think we should really focus on that piece. I actually think the obstruction of justice debate is keeping us from the core substance of what even the Barr letter says, which to me may not be criminal but certainly is, and I'm trying to find a word for it, sort of unbecoming of a president and his campaign. Whether it's impeachable is a political debate.</s>LEMON: So, this -- Phil, this is what Barr wrote about obstruction of justice. He said, "A determination was made without regard to and is not based on the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president." But you know, Barr is speaking for himself and Rod Rosenstein in this letter and not Mueller. How significant is that, do you think?</s>MUDD: I think it's hugely significant. You've got to anticipate we keep talking about the document that Robert Mueller as a public servant eventually is going to go and speak his own words before the Congress. I suspect that will be in an open hearing. I mean, I served under Mueller for four and a half years. He's not going to punt a problem. If he's looking at the facts, he's going to make a determination of the facts. That's what he's done in decades as a prosecutor. I looked at this, and when I first saw it, Don, my first view is director Mueller when I knew him, now Special Counsel Mueller, knew that people would immediately pick up on the fact that he chose not to make a decision on obstruction. That meant that people would start to debate it and the Congress would pick it up. He must have anticipated that. He did not anticipate that because he couldn't make a decision based on the facts. There's got to be something else in terms of his questions about the process here and the Congress has to hear him speak. Forget about the document. I want to hear what he says.</s>LEMON: So, this key line, Renato, is from Mueller's report. "The investigation did not establish -- did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities." But there's got to be more on that, right? What do you think Barr is leaving out here?</s>MARIOTTI: Well, it's a good question. If you notice, the first letter is bracketed. So, it suggests that it's the second half of a sentence. It's bizarre that Barr didn't quote the complete sentence. It's unclear why he didn't. But given what he did with the rest of the letter, you might wonder whether or not there's some qualifier there like although, you know, x, y, z, maybe although there's substantial evidence of something or another the investigation did not establish. So, you know, I really think that Barr, instead of looking at this as a partisan -- a win or lose Republican-Democrat thing really could have been looking at his role in history here. This is arguably the most important investigation in American history, certainly in my lifetime. And for Mr. Barr to not just lay it out there for everyone I think is -- it speaks poorly for him and how he'll be remembered in history.</s>LEMON: So, Juliette, you said you didn't want to -- you thought we were focusing a lot on this obstruction thing. But I'm just wondering, what does it say to you? Does it mean that Mueller didn't have sufficient evidence?</s>KAYYEM: Or that because of the rule that he clearly was defining himself under you that cannot indict a sitting president that the obstruction of -- that without the underlying crime you couldn't -- this is Barr's excuse, or explanation. You would not go forward given that it was 49-51, say, with the obstruction of justice charges on their own, right? And so, in other words, standing alone he's not going to do the obstruction of justice. I don't think it's fair -- we're not doing it but, Mueller punted this decision. I think Mueller basically said this is a close call, there's no underlying crime that I was charged, that I with a very specific mandate, I was charged with that would justify a second prosecution for obstruction of justice. And therefore, that will be the determination for the Department of Justice or the House to determine whether we move forward with this. I think it's -- I don't think he punted it. I think he actually said without the underlying crime we're not going to move forward on our own. And I think what's important here, and this is just having to do with the release of the report at this stage, even if we can argue that certain pieces will not be released, where we are right now as a country's unsustainable. And so, Barr, if he wants to redeem himself, and there's a question about whether, you know, whether he was just trying to give a summary, whatever, has got to get that report out, you know, by the end of this week. This is not sustainable as a democracy. And someone will start to release that report. There's no question in my mind at this stage. Because you cannot have a democracy like this where we don't see the underlying accusations that may fall short of a crime but are once again unbecoming of a president of the United States and his campaign.</s>LEMON: Juliette, Phil, Renato, thank you very much. I appreciate your time.</s>KAYYEM: Thank you.</s>LEMON: I want to bring in now Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse who's on the Judiciary Committee. Senator, thank you very much for joining us. Today Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer tried to bring to a vote the unanimous House resolution that would make the Mueller report public. But Leader McConnell objected. Why won't McConnell allow a vote on this?</s>SEN. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE (D) RHODE ISLAND: I do not know. I think maybe it would put some of his Republicans in a bad position. That's usually the reason that he blocks things. But that doesn't make much sense. The president saying that this should be transparent. With the House having voted unanimously to clear it. So hard to tell.</s>LEMON: You've made it clear all along that you want the full Mueller report to be public. What in your estimation -- what is your estimation of Barr, the memo that Barr sent to Congress? Do you trust his interpretation of Mueller's report?</s>WHITEHOUSE: I don't because I haven't seen the report and it leaves such huge questions unanswered. The two biggest unanswered questions are first, what was the scope of the Mueller report? What was the scope of his investigation? Did he look at Trump's tax returns? Did he look at this weird change in the Ukraine platform at the Republican convention? And then the second is what led to this very peculiar hand-off from Mueller who took the job with the intention of removing these decisions from the political people and punted it to the top political person at the department, the obstruction decision. So we need -- there's some basic framing questions that we need answered in order to get into more detailed questions.</s>LEMON: Wasn't that essentially the special counsel's job, is to determine these things, but then he ended up punting it back to --</s>WHITEHOUSE: Yes.</s>LEMON: -- the attorney general, or to the attorney general at least?</s>WHITEHOUSE: Correct. That's the entire reason you have a special counsel, so that a law enforcement decision would be made outside of politics. And here you have the guy charged to making that decision pushing it back to the attorney general, who is not only the top political appointee at the department but also somebody who had voiced a lot of opinion about obstruction of justice charges against the president to begin with.</s>LEMON: Yes.</s>WHITEHOUSE: Not exactly a clean slate.</s>LEMON: Today the attorney general told Senator Lindsey Graham, the chairman of your committee, your committee judiciary, that he is willing to testify. What do you most want to ask him?</s>WHITEHOUSE: I want to get the story of what conversation there was back and forth between him and Mueller that led to this peculiar situation with the obstruction charge. And I want to have Mueller there to describe the scope of his investigation because if there were big chunks, like was there personal or financial kompromat developed against Trump, if that was not part of Mueller's investigation then we need to know that. Because I think we're inclined to accept the stuff that Mueller actually investigated and made a decision on, but if he didn't, then obviously he's entitled to no deference in areas he didn't look at.</s>LEMON: So, you want Mueller -- you want Mueller to testify. And how do you plan about going --</s>WHITEHOUSE: I'd like to see the three of them side by side. Mueller, Rosenstein, who's been the steady through thread on this, and Barr.</s>LEMON: All together?</s>WHITEHOUSE: All together.</s>LEMON: Publicly?</s>WHITEHOUSE: Publicly.</s>LEMON: Publicly. The president is claiming a complete exoneration from this report, saying that he wants to see some investigations of his own. Watch this.</s>DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There are a lot of people out there that have done some very, very evil things, very bad things. I would say treasonous things against our country. And hopefully people that people that have done such harm to our country -- we've gone through a period of really bad things happening. Those people will certainly be looked at. I've been looking at them for a long time, and I'm saying why haven't they been looked at?</s>LEMON: So, what do you think he's talking about? And what do you make of his demeanor?</s>WHITEHOUSE: I think he's talking about the FBI people and the national security people who started off this investigation when the concerns first came to light that he may have been compromised and that there may be ongoing Russian interference with the campaign. As it turned out, what Mueller proved is they were right. There was ongoing Russian interference with the campaign. So, it's hard to fault him for that. But I think he's a vengeful person. I don't think he can tell the difference between himself and the United States. So, I think when he's talking about, they've done a lot of harm to our country, what he really means is they've done a lot of harm to me. And as far as I'm concerned, you know, bring it on. I think he has a lot more to lose from a thorough and open investigation into what took place and led up to this investigation than he does to gain from it. So, my guess is that people in the White House are saying you might want to dial that back a little bit because we don't know what we're going to turn over if we start turning over these rocks. A lot of the stuff that's going to come out from those rocks I think is going to look really bad for Donald Trump.</s>LEMON: Senator Whitehouse, thank you for your time.</s>WHITEHOUSE: Of course.</s>LEMON: The president is wasting no time attacking his perceived enemies in the wake of what we've learned about Mueller's findings. But will that help him in 2020?