he's saying that the president's argument is because there's no collusion, therefore, it would be unlikely that he would even need to be interviewed. does that make sense? >> no, because there are. >> as i said, there are the three work streams. one is the financial crime thing, that has nothing to do with collusion per say. that's money laundering and other illegal activities, ala manafort. then there's obstruction. that has nothing to do with collusion either. did you intend to conduct collusion. he may have some latitude of what the parameters are, but he can't avoid it. >> to point out from an inves ta ga tory perspective, the fbi and mueller have to make sure every stone is uncovered before they wrap up the investigation interviewing him doesn't necessarily mean they think he's