statements. i don't know. i mean i don't think that this changes the calculus, at least in the short term, about whether he testifies or not. but i just don't see the sense in it. >> ashley parker. >> again, i mean it makes absolutely no sense. the president is getting dangerously close to almost pushing for an outcome that he doesn't want and wouldn't benefit him. so you have don mcgahn, who is someone who based on the mueller report and based on everything we understand, repeatedly actually saved the president from himself. the president may not have liked it in those moments, and in fact he didn't. at the time we heard a lot about clashes with don mcgahn and he didn't like don mcgahn because don mcgahn would stand up to him and give him the lawyer's point of view. and it turns out in hindsight, the president is very lucky that don mcgahn was there playing that role. don mcgahn only testified for those 30 hours you mentioned because he was abiding by -- and you can disagree if it's good or bad strategy, but he was abiding