obstruction of justice. until he takes the step, it is a hypothetical question. jeremy herb, thank you so much. all right, let s talk a little bit more about this. former u.s. attorney greg brower with me now, and former associate white house counsel under george w. bush administration jameel jafford. good to see you both. reportedly the president is fuming over his feud with sessions but he s worried about mueller s reaction if he were to fire sessions, so what would be some of the possible problems if the president were to fire sessions? you know, the potential problems with the president firing the attorney general are too numerous to mention in a few minutes on the air here today. his recent rants really are bizarre. and i will tell you this, i ve worked with the attorney general, with the deputy attorney general, with the fbi director, and i would tell you two things i know for sure about those three men. one is that they are absolutely
it s one of his closest advisers. that being said, you can t go after the attorney general because you don t like how the investigation is going. that s what makes it problematic for the president. greg. this was surprising to hear from senator graham who s friendly with the attorney general. i ve heard that senator graham is now trying to walk it back in some sense beau saying, well, look, i m simply saying these things to talk the president down from taking action now. but of course with friends like that, who needs enemies? it was a very surprising turn of events. and now you ve got two close trump allies who have been granted immunity to talk and, you know, one would wonder, jameel, what s the ill munt? what would, you know, these folks have to hide or protect themselves from in order to get
prolific tweeter and he has posted negative tweets at least 14 times about jeff sessions. this as we re learning that mueller s prosecutors have requested 50 new subpoenas in the manafort case. michael schmidt is here. and greg brower, a former u.s. attorney, a former assistant director for the office of congressional affairs at the fbi and a partner brownstein hyatt and shrek. the tweets in question, how much are they paying attention to the jeff sessions tweets in particular, and what are they looking for? so it s not just the tweets. it s when you take the tweets and you line them up against what the president was doing in private. the president privately trying to get comey to say that he is not under investigation when comey says he won t do that, the president goes out and raises questions about his job. the same thing with sessions. the president was trying to get
sessions to quit. he wanted someone loyal to oversee the russia investigation. sessions wouldn t go. the president last july laufrmgs a three-day attack on sessions, twitter from statements from the rose garden and statements in interviews with the times and the wall street journal. greg, rudy giuliani would say, and he has argued, that obstruction is something you do in private or you do secretly and you are sneaking around. you are not doing it out in the open, tweeting about jeff sessions is not obstruction. that s not what this case is. is that the same way that federal prosecutors would see it? not necessarily. i think it typically that may be the case with most perpetrators of obstruction, but with the president in particular we ve seen that he rarely does anything in private or discreetly. there is not much that he doesn t put out there on twitter. so it seems to me that there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that looks a lot like obstruction. i think the bigger issue