former national security official to get an idea of what kind of goes into the process and the official says at least the last couple years since early in the trump administration the white house has tried to limit the details of calls from leaking out to the media. here's what he had to say. >> when i handled transcripts of presidential phone calls last year, we put the transcripts into a very secure, top secret code word system. i don't see any difference from what this alleged whistleblower is claiming. i don't think there was any change. >> reporter: now, the white house is denying any sort of a coverup here. president trump again active on twitter. we don't expect to see the president over the weekend on camera but crazier things have happened. we'll be watching to see what happens next. eric: mark, thanks. arthel: three house committees issued subpoenas for secretary of state mike pompeo for documents as part of the impeachment inquiry. the material had been demanded earlier and the panels are given secretary pompeo until next friday to comply with the
sigh commit -- policy committee. lots of criticism now aimed at the attorney general. why did the doj apparently deep six the complaint, why did they not pass it to congress, as required by law, why did the doj decide not to investigate poll campaign finance violations in the call. do you think the attorney general has done anything wrong. >> >> it's hard to know here. i don't think there's any offed to suggest the ag did anything wrong here. the question, whether he has to recuse, that's the question of how involved he was in the underlying matter, whether he was materially participating in it. all we know is the president's had a phone call to date we haven't heard anything that barr did anything, that he called or did any actions at all. it's not clear what the ag would have done in terms of asking the ukrainian president to investigate joe biden or his son. so obviously an odd thing raised by the president, with the president of the ukraine, but
-- legal debates and there'sable discussions about it, not necessarily a coverup where a judgment is made. once the ag made the decision, it was the folks in the office of lee l ga legal counsel, so ie idea that the ag runs the justice department but it may go too far to say there was a coverup and to say there was a coverup of a coverup. we don't have evidence of that. there's an investigation to be done. it's concerning that we rush to judgment ahead of time. if there was a coverup, it should be gone after. eric: how about the non-referral of a possible campaign violation? clearly in the president's words he's asking zalinski to investigate joe biden. his spouter supporters would sas because he was concerned about corruption. critics would say, no, he wanted it to affect the political campaign. >> obviously, a very concerning situation about what the president was asking the president of ukraine to do, obviously very troubling.
at the same time, what happened here is the justice department got the information from the national security council from the cia who got it first and they referred it to the criminal division which is within the justice department, responsible for prosecuting crimes. they looked it and assessed there was no crime here. bob mueller charged the russian folks with violations, conspiracies that involve underlying campaign finance violations. there may be a legal theory under which you could prosecute. the question is what is the justice department going to do and their assessment was there was no violation. they're entitled to make that judgment. they could refer is to the u.s. for dc and we could see what happens there. eric: i don't know if your wife wants groceries or if it's a viewer, but if you want to put your iphone on silence for a second because they're going to get you again. carrie kupak said this. the president has not asked the attorney general to contact ukraine on this or any other
>> they're out of control. the socialist democrats in washington are now the party of impeachment. and literally, just a few days ago, they were as you said talking about impeaching justice kavanaugh and they had a whistleblower complaint. they now are shifting back over to impeaching the president which they said they wanted to do. >> reporter: house democrats have insisted they have every right and really the responsibility to hold the president accountable, especially after a whistleblower raised concerns the president was trying to get ukraine to dig up dirt on his potential 2020 rival, former vice president joe biden. >> i think we have to stay focused as far as the public is concerned on the fact that the president of the united states used taxpayer dollars to shake down the leader of another country for his own political gain. >> reporter: lawmakers say they also want to know if the white house tried to cover up the conversation the president had with the president of ukraine by placing records of the call into a classified system, fox news had a chance to speak to a
the underlying matter, but also his analysis of whether there was a crime here. if in fact the congress goes forward with the impeachment effort, the ag will be likely called to testify because he appears to be a material part of this question. that alone may be a basis for recusal. the last time a an attorney general recused from a matter involved in the president, the president got very upset. we saw the shaming of jeff sessions all over twitter. that i may take effect if the attorney general decides to recuse. eric: the democrats and those in the hill will probably be hearing from him, rather shortly. always good to see you, thank you. >> appreciate it. eric: we have reaction from a member of congress coming up. we'll interview him about the subpoena of mike pompeo and this
matter. she said the president has not spoken with the attorney general about having ukraine investigate anything relating to former vice president biden or his son. so that's a pretty clear statement there. you have this in usa today. quote, make no mistake, these facts now implicate the attorney general, the nation's chief law enforcement officer directly in the commission of acts that many of our country's leading legal experts consider federal crimes. whether as election law violations, bribery or other offenses concerning public corruption. the revelation of the possible involvement should alarm all of us concerned with the rule of law in this country. at a minimum, it's no longer sustainable for the attorney general to oversee the handling of the ukraine scandal. how do the facts implicate the attorney general if the doj says he wasn't involved. >> i think the real challenge as you point out, eric, correctly, is this question of what did the ag do and when, what was the involvement with
not clear what the ag's role if any was in this matter and the underlying matter at all. eric: the democrats say that the picture's already in, it's clear that he's doing the president's bidding, they accuse him of acting like the president's personal lawyer by the actions the justice department apparently took by not releasing this material, by not sending it to congress and you heard nancy pelosi calling it the coverup of the coverup. of tto you, does that hold any water? >> there's a very fair debate going on about whether or how the whistleblower complaint should have been delivered to congress. the question is whether this was a matter arising under the intelligence role of the dni. there was apparently a debate within the justice department, whether that was the case, they decided no which is why they advised the dni not to release it. it involved the use of the intelligence system at the white house where they stored the material and whether the underlying discussions came under the purview. these are lee l gal debates and
when insurance is simple, it's surprisingly painless. ericthe whistleblower complaintd impeachment inquiry consuming washington and the nation. but it's also having an impact on the campaign trail this weekend. joe biden finding him at the center of it all, with the president asking for an investigation of mr. biden. allison barber is live in t detroit. there's a union forum going on with the uaw, teamsters and all the other union work in detroit. hi, allison. >> reporter: a lot of stuff going on. hi, eric. we have two presidential candidates who are set to arrive in the detroit area tomorrow, senators elizabeth warren and amy klobuchar are coming to speak or they are set to speak at a forum hosted by the largest private sector union, both candidates called for impeachment proceedings to begin months ago. senator warren is reminding
voters of that, as some of her 2020 competitors come out in support of it now. >> i called for an impeachment because i believe it was clear that the president had broken the law and that congress needed to hold him accountable. the way to hold him accountable is to impeach him. i hope we go forward with care and deliberation, but that we do it quickly. >> reporter: candidates who were slower to support impeachment seem to be changing their minds. they're also making it clear they don't want it to overshadow their campaigns. >> i think that every moment we are talking about donald trump is a victory for donald trump and that includes when we talk about impeachment. they said the impeachment media spotlight ended up drawing attention away from that vision, i think it's not good for the country. >> reporter: another 2020 hopeful who has supported impeachment in the past, bay toe