Allowed to get any tax return he wants. And there is no exception in the law when it comes to the president. In fact, the law was written specifically to account for the need to get the president s taxes in a circumstance like this. Nevertheless, treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin has just said tonight that he is not going to meet that midnight deadline. Secretary mnuchin says he will personally oversee a review of the request instead. Quote, given the seriousness of these issues, which bear no connection to ordinary tax administration, we have begun consultations with the department of justice to ensure that our response is fully consistent with the law and the constitution. So, the law says the irs clearly shall hand over any tax return the chairman asks for. The irs did not do that. They punted to the treasury secretary. The treasury secretary now says he is consulting. He is reviewing. While the law waits for him to follow it, which is what he will ultimately have to do here. But while that rubicon is busy being crossed tonight with regard to the president s taxes, tonight we have also just learned that the president s older sister, a longtime federal Appeals Court judge named Maryanne Trump Barry, she is now retiring from the federal bench. This is an interesting story. Thanks to aggressive reporting on the trump family fortune and the trump business empire, particularly from the New York Times, while the president simultaneously has refused to release his tax returns, tonight the times is reporting that judge Maryanne Trump Barry had come under investigation for possibly violating judicial conduct rules by taking part in fraudulent tax schemes with her siblings going back to the trump Family Business in the 1990s, which of course is what the New York Times has exposed in recent months. The times says the court confirmed the investigation into the president s older sister in february. The times says tonight that President Trumps sister, the judge, filed her retirement papers ten days later. Ten days after the court confirmed that she was under investigation for potentially violating judicial rules of conduct for her role in these alleged trump family tax avoidance schemes. So she apparently retired ten days after this court reported that the court confirmed that she was under investigation in february. We are just learning of her retirement tonight. Importantly, her retirement, her status change at the court will end the investigation into her for her potential role in those tax schemes. Again, it was not a criminal investigation into her. It was an investigation into whether or not she was violating judicial rules of conduct by her retiring so she is no longer a judge, that investigation and any potential consequences of that investigation for her, those all disappear. Poof. And because the jets are wide open tonight, we have also just learned that the National Enquirer supermarket tabloid is apparently expected to be sold imminently. This is another amazing story. Washington post reports tonight that the hedge fund that owns a controlling stake in the enquirer has grown, quote, disgusted with the tabloids reporting tactics and, hey, disgusting a hedge fund that owns the National Enquirer is an impressive feat. I mean, what did they think they were buying . Reportedly, talk about selling the National Enquirer started in august. That was just when American Media was finalizing a nonprosecution agreement with federal prosecutors for their role in covering up unfavorable stories about the president. And, you know, i dont know if this is related, but cnn is also reporting tonight that the richest man in the world, amazon ceo jeff bezos, is now reportedly meeting with federal prosecutors in new york, meeting with them as soon as this week over his claims that the National Enquirer attempted to extort him with pictures from his extramarital affair. Now, are these two stories related . The National Enquirer being suddenly put up for sale and bezos meeting with federal prosecutors about his claims reporting the enquirer . I dont know if those two stories are related, but that issue with bezos and the National Enquirers alleged behavior toward him, that did raise questions early on about whether that kind of behavior by the tabloid might have violated the nonprosecution agreement they entered into with federal prosecutors that they were supposed to be abiding by in an ongoing way. I mean, if the National Enquirer and its Parent Company violate the terms of that nonprosecution agreement, the agreement is ripped up, and then that company and its executives could be prosecuted for everything that prosecutors have on them, and we know from the prosecution of Michael Cohen that prosecutors at least have on them that they participated in Campaign Finance felonies designed to aid the president s election. So if their agreement is moot, if their agreement is gone, if they have screwed that up because of the bezos thing, bezos talking to prosecutors and the enquirer suddenly being up for sale, suddenly being disgusting to its owners, its not hard to imagine that those two things might not be coincidentally breaking at the same time. But, wait, there is more, because its never enough. Also tonight, lawyers for Obama White House counsel, the first Obama White House counsel, greg craig, say they expect that he will be indicted as soon as tomorrow morning by u. S. Attorneys in d. C. Now, this is not about work that greg craig did in the Obama White House when he was Obamas White House counsel. This is somewhat amazingly in connection to work that greg craig did in private practice after his stint at the Obama White House. It was work that he did in connection with Trump Campaign chairman paul manafort. Gregory craig allegedly had a role in a key incident that was part of manaforts illegal lobbying for the prorussian government of ukraine. Manafort has just started a federal prison sentence for a number of crimes, including that illegal lobbying for that government. Greg craig allegedly participated in a key part of that. Were going to have more on that coming up later on in the show. But, bottom line, greg craigs lawyers say that he is expecting to be indicted in federal court as early as tomorrow. So, there is a lot going on. Stay by your tv. Were going to start tonight, though, with the attorney general of the United States today making an unusual decision. Today, the attorney general decided to throw a big can of gasoline on to the always smoldering fires of trump world conspiracy theories about the russia investigation and Robert Mueller. News just broke today that you have a special team looking into why the fbi opened an investigation into russian interference in the 2016 elections. Can you share with us why you feel a need to do that . I think spying on a Political Campaign is a big deal. Its a big deal. The generation i grew up in, which is the vietnam war period, people were all concerned about spying on antiwar people and so forth by the government. And there were a lot of rules put in place to make sure that there is an adequate basis before our Law Enforcement agencies get involved in political surveillance. Im not suggesting that those rules were violated, but i think its important to look at that. And im not just im not talking about the fbi necessarily, but intelligence agencies more broadly. So youre not youre not suggesting, though, that spying occurred . I dont well, i guess you could i think there was, spying did occur, yes. I think spying did occur. Are you sure you want to say that . Do you know exactly what you mean to say here . Do you want to think about it . It may be that attorney general william barr is just, you know, he is curious. He is a curious guy. He wants to ask questions. He is recently appointed. He has only been there seven weeks. You take a new job. You want to be thorough, right . Im not suggesting any rules were violated, but spying on a Political Campaign, that would be a huge deal. Did spying happen . Well, i mean, you know, did anything ever come of that whole yearplus long effort by the president to say that maybe the fbi investigation into russian interference in the elections was just one big hoax . It was just made up. Whatever happened to that claim . Are we still trying to say that with obama tapping his wires and all that . Are we still saying that . Is that still the line were working . Just curious. Should we chase that down . I mean, when the attorney general of the United States goes before congress and says there was spying on the Trump Campaign, thats not a dog whistle to the president and his allies about the thoroughly debunked conspiracy theories about Robert Mueller and spying and president obama having wiretaps. Thats not a dog whistle. Thats an air horn. And whatever reason attorney general william barr decided to blow that air horn today, its interesting. It comes on the same day that we got fresh evidence of how and why the investigation into russia and the Trump Campaign really did begin in 2016. And specifically, how alarmed the countrys Top National Security officials were at the intelligence they were seeing and the evidence they were seeing and how seriously they took their obligation to look into it. Because all this happened today with the attorney general on the same day that we got a new transcript of another day of testimony that the fbis general counsel gave to congress behind closed doors last october. This is testimony thats never before seen the light of day. It was not unsealed. It was released today by republican members of the committee. James baker was the fbis general counsel in the summer of 2016 when the counterintelligence investigation began into any potential links between the Trump Campaign and russia interfering in the election. Heres how james baker describes the beginning of the investigation. Again, this transcript just released to the public for the first time today. Quote, we were concerned that the russians were engaged in an effort to try to impact our elections, that particular election. And we were trying to figure out exactly what they were doing and how they were doing it. Question, well, was the case a priority for the fbi . James baker, yes. Question, did you think that was the right decision . Baker, yes. Question, why . Baker, because if the russians were trying to influence something as fundamental as a president ial election, i thought that would be a particular threat to the country, because so much of our system depends on the integrity of our elections. So much of our constitution system depends on the integrity of the elections. Question, would that threat to the National Security increase if the president was elected and therefore obtained classified briefings and was exposed to the nations most secretive secrets if there was someone within, if he or someone within his campaign had been in fact working with the russians . Answer, from jim baker, let me answer that generally. I guess i would say, i think we would i think we were concerned about anyone who might enter government and be in a position to have access to classified or Sensitive Information who might provide that to a foreign power. Question, how serious would that concern be . James baker, extremely serious. You know, with remarkable consistency, every time we get one of these transcripts from a senior fbi official, Senior Justice Department official, senior National Security official who is at all involved in this investigation, they describe their work in 2016 in these very simple terms. They saw signs of the russian government interfering to try to influence our election, and they saw all these unexplained contacts between russians and the Trump Campaign, and they were concerned about the implications of that. They were concerned that the country and therefore the Trump Campaign itself, they were concerned that the campaign should be protected from whatever was going on. I mean, weirdly, it is the republicans in congress who have been unilaterally releasing these transcripts over the past few weeks. I dont know what smoking gun they expect us to find here. I mean, nobody in these interviews has even hinted at the possibility that there was any politically motivated spying on the Trump Campaign. But you know what . Maybe it wasnt the fbi. One of the odd things about the attorney generals testimony today is that even as he said he believed spying on the Trump Campaign did occur, he kept going out of his way to say he was not necessarily talking about the fbi doing that spying. He was talking about the Intelligence Community more broadly. Okay. What could he mean . If he is talking about the fbi and the Justice Department, honestly, the fbi and the Justice Department are on the record over and over again saying, no, they didnt do any spying on the Trump Campaign, and nobody has yet found any evidence to call that into question. If barr is talking about as attorney general, he is going to investigate the Intelligence Community instead, thats a little weird. Its a little off, but okay. Maybe thats what he is doing. That said, mark warner, who is the Ranking Member on the Senate Intelligence committee, the committee that oversees the Intelligence Community, and he has been that for a long time, mark warner today in response to these comments from the attorney general says, nope, he would know as the top democrat on the Intelligence Committee. And it wasnt the Intelligence Community spying on the Trump Campaign either. It didnt happen. Im flabbergasted by the attorney generals comments. I dont get it. Is the attorney general questioning whether russia intervened . Is he questioning whether russia intervened in the campaign on behalf of trump and against clinton, things that the Intelligence Community has unanimously agreed upon . Is he somehow saying that the fbi and the department of justice shouldnt have started a counterintelligence investigation . Remember, back in the summer and fall of 2016, the Intelligence Community brought this information to the full gang of eight in an effort to try to warn the American Public about russia was doing this. He is saying the Intelligence Community should have sat on that information . I think the attorney generals comments today do a great disservice to the men and women at the fbi and the department of justice who i think back in 2016 were just doing their job, but what i feel is this man with this much experience who is using these partisan talking points from some of the far right that had been, frankly, investigated and litigated a half dozen times already, i dont get it. Have you ever seen youve delved into this subject particularly. We have reviewed this extensively. The whole basis, the first part of our bipartisan Senate IntelligenceCommittee Investigation was looking at what the Intelligence Community did in terms of making their findings that russia intervened, and they did it on behalf of one candidate, donald trump against another one, hillary clinton. Nobody has questioned that. We have reviewed this extensively. The Intelligence Community was not spying on the Trump Campaign. They were investigating russian interference. The fbi and doj were not spying on the Trump Campaign. So what is bill barr talking about when he says, yeah, i think there was spying on the Trump Campaign. I mean, im assuming that he didnt just, you know, make that up. Like, i heard somebody talking than on fox friends, didnt i . Yeah, didnt that happen . Im assuming this is based on something. To give them the benefit of the doubt, conceivably maybe he is talking about Foreign Intelligence Services doing the spying . I mean, we do know it has been reported that there was intelligence that our foreign allies shared with their u. S. Counterparts once they encountered contacts between the Trump Campai