Coverage of national and international news, including breaking stories. lamier. thank you for making the trip. caroline, i want to start with you though. how legal csignificant is this? this is a 10. the reason people are scratching their heads because it is so blatant. i don t think you can over state the importance of this mission because that s what it is. his son took a meeting to get dirt on hillary clinton. why it is important is because there is a specific criminal statue that makes it illegal to accept something of value from a foreign national as it pertain to the federal election. he s taking all those boxes in terms of a statutory case. the president says it is totally legal and it is done all the time. getting information from a foreign enties ties is not all affiliated people with that conspiracy. these people now this meeting could be unindicted koch conspirator of the larger agency. stay with us, here in new jersey, phil rucker, as you are brewing of everything that s going on. you say he s privately brewing and publicly roaring as one adviser describes the president thinking he does not believe his son broke the law but is fearful none the less that trump jr. inadvertedly may have wandered into legal johnny deppty. ity . he s worried about his son and he feels like his son may not have knowingly broken the law or ignorant of the law but may have wandered in some jeopardy here. he s getting nervous because robert mueller and his probe are getting closer and closer to the president and his family and the inner circle. there is a sense inside the trump orbit that another big indictment can come in the next few weeks by mueller as he tries to get some of this work done for the midterm elections kick into high-gear. that speeds up a lot of the president s anxiety and fear. there is the piece where the president is trying to and his team put out this public narrative of what they believe happen and the talking point. jonathan, that s what you are writing about now. even if the meeting was held to collect damaging information none was provided and collusion, donald trump s go go to discus that never occurred. we have seen how the white house and its lawyers trying to defend the president s action and explain what happened. donald trump tweets no collusion quite a bit. caroline was sort of explaining through. they re trying to find it on public concerns. that s what rudy giuliani is here for, not for the lawyer in the courtroom but the public relations. our reporting was very nicely of what phil did. the president is in a dark place and partially triggered by everyday watching cable news and seeing images of paul manafort s trial which started last week. that became a slap in the face and a reminder of the situation. it is really about bob mueller and in the senses that it is closing in. when he goes to mar-a-lago, he s surrounded by everything that has his name on it and surrounded by friends. he gets revved up. we saw this is where he made the final decision to fire james comey and this is where he unleashed his tweet yesterday. the evolution of that talking point, is that a valid argument in your view. do you think that holds work? if not in the court of legal opinion or public opinion. rudy giuliani came out hard with that talking point. i would say that we in the media have all the term collusion. robert mueller have not used the term collusion. it is sort of a straw man and false narrative in that regard. the word collusion is not in sort of the heading of any criminal statute. free a fair election would come under the collusion-like idea. conspiracy to violate campaign laws or conspiracy for antihacking laws. that s all under this rubric of collusion. there is a lot of stuff that the president could be talking about, china firing back on tariffs of u.s. goods. a judge ordering resources of the daca program. this is not a test for cnbc. this message from fox and friends this morning. i want to play something that brian kilmeade said. i think president trump would have successes if he tweet less of lebron and if he ll tweet about wildfires, it will allow his administration done well. we know the president have taken advice from fox and friends before. now you have the president s favorite morning cable program saying you got to get on track and tweet about this other stuff. we know he does take advice from fox news when he s on air. we know he talks to sean hannity quite a bit. that s actually receptive, the president is receptive of what he sees on television than what he gets on a staff meeting. there are so many other things going on but he keeps on getting bogged down with this because the shadow of the mueller probe. phil and jonathan and caroline. thank you for this. thank you for balmy new jersey here. the final day of campaigning in a little district with big implications as democrats hope to flip republican stronghold. the president is tapping in another cultural war going after the biggest name in pro sport. we are covering it live on the road in new jersey. it is the 181st day of president trump spending his presidency at one of his properties about a third of the time in his office. . he s the one. (vo love is knowing. it was meant to be. and love always keeps you safe. (vo) love is why we built a car you can trust for a long time. the all-new subaru impreza sedan and five-door. a car you can love no matter what road you re on. the subaru impreza. more than a car, it s a subaru. right now, get 0% apr financing on the 2018 subaru impreza. i ve been making blades here at gillette for 20 years. there s a lot of innovation that goes into making america s #1 shave. precision machinery and high-quality materials from around the world. nobody else even comes close. now starting at $7.99. gillette. the best a man can get. it s a high-tech revolution in sleep. the new sleep number 360 smart bed. it intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts on each side to keep you both comfortable. and snoring? how smart is that? smarter sleep. to help you lose your dad bod, train for that marathon, and wake up with the patience of a saint. the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999. smarter sleep will change your life. are you ready to take your then you need xfinity xfi.? a more powerful way to stay connected. it gives you super fast speeds for all your devices, provides the most wifi coverage for your home, and lets you control your network with the xfi app. it s the ultimate wifi experience. xfinity xfi, simple, easy, awesome. republicans maybe eye balling the special election today. registered republicans out number democrats 2-1. where the president won by 11 points in 2016. right now less than 24 hours out, this race is close. it is really close. we are talking about ohio s 12th congressional district. the district that in fact elect elected john kasich. it is a district that s reliably read for decades. the democrats that s running there. the 30-year-old. the republican state senator troy balison who was with the president this weekend. if the democrats get in, they ll raise your taxes and people pouring into the border. why is that a blue wave? i think it should be a red one. that rally was the last attempt to boost turn out. the broader republican effort here has been huge. politico reporting the rnc opened two officers in the district. they sent the guy who ran the president s 2016 ohio campaign to the district and super pac. paul ryan has spent more than $3.5 million in tbs. this race is close with the latest poll giving a 1 point advantage to balderson. thank you for being on the program. good morning. there is a bit of a delay but we ll work the best. they say republicans are testing the message for the midterm being more polarizing. is that going to work? i don t think so. either party want the country to come together. they re tired of the president intentionally trying to divide and daniel conner is focusing on the real issue and bringing people together. premiums are going up and he did not remain bankruptcies among senior citizens are up by 2%. i think that s why danny is going to win this race. john kasich somebody that you know was out talking about this race yesterday on abc. here is what he said regarding democrats message. the problem that democrats have, i don t know what their message is, it is sort of like anti-trump but no message. you can t win an election. that s what puts the democrats at risk here at midterm elections from having a bigger wave than what we ll probably have. congressman, i am about to say something, john kasich and donald trump are on the same page in this especially when it comes to this race. is that a problem for you guys? they re both putting on their republican party jerseys at a time where people are not aligning with parties like they should. danny is talking about healthcare and pensions and talking about wage growth. the issues that are important and democrats across the country are talking about those bread and butter that are facing family when they sit down in the kitchen table and he s talking about them and i think governor k kasich is wrong on that issue. he s wrong on supporting the republican right now. he s going to campaign for someone who ll go to d.c. and dismantle the medicaid dispansion that governor kay si kasich is for. let me ask you a couple of quick things before i let you go. lebron james, you were talking about him over the weekend in new orleans. you talked about the president doing race baiting and making racial statements against relon. p. racial statements against relon. p.. lebron. do you think the president is being racist? he s got to always find a black person or a brown person that he got to make fun of and stimulate a certain portion of constituents that he has and a certain following that he has. to do it for lebron james after he announced a $41 million initiative to start a school in akron, ohio, to give kids shoes and glasses and bicycles and train their parents to pmake sue they get a g.e.d. or training and sending these kids on a scholarship, the president of the united states should not be calling anyone dumb. he s responsibility is to unite the country and not divide the country. when you do it to lebron james in ohio, i think he ll get the last laugh. before i let you go here congressman, there is a bunch of headlines. people talking about congressional candidate not supporting nancy pelosi. this is an art thgument that yoe well aware of. democrats say they will not vote for her and saying they have no candidates to point to. would you like to see somebody else do it or would you like to make a bit on it? i have not closed the door on it. i have had before congress crowley lost his race. we ll have these conversations after the election and i will be out campaigning for other members of congress who are running, some in iowa. i will be down in west virginia. we got a great candidate down there. i was helping with the race in columbus. we are helping and i have not closed the door on that. okay, congressman tim ryan, thank you for coming on the show, come back soon. we appreciate it. thank you, halie. coming up, the government star witness may take the stand as soon as this afternoon. rick gates, the one time right hand man-to-man fort is prepare to tell it all about his boss. remember this is where a lot of meetings and cabinets happening during the transition and also where the president made the fiery comment of north korea one year ago this week. oh, look. another anti-wrinkle cream in no hurry to make anything happen. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair® works in just one week. with the fastest retinol formula available. it s clinically proven to work on fine lines and wrinkles. one week? that definitely works! rapid wrinkle repair®. and for dark spots, rapid tone repair. neutrogena®. see what s possible. week of robert mueller s star witness is set to take the stand. we are talking about rick gates, manafort s right hand man. he s expected to testify before his former boss. his testimony is expected to focus on square ly on manafort business practices. gates stayed on the trump campaign even after manafort was pushed out through the election and during the early days of the trump presidency. ken dilanian is joining me now back home. let s talk about rick gates here, what we think he s going to say? there is a chance because this judge is moving things along. there is 15 minutes at the end of the day and if there is as witness to be called, rick gates. what he brings to the trial is insights of the state of mind and motivation. prosecutions have shown a lot of evidence that paul manafort have broken the law. they have bookkeepers testifying of bank fraud and tax fraud. these were employees. rick gates was a prodigy. rick gates was charged of serious crime. the defense really did not go after him and paying him as a liar and just testifying against saving his own skin. rick gates admitted to lying to the fbi. to counter act that. prosecutors are going to have confront up front to the jury so by the time defense cross-examining him, the jury is going to know everything he did. this is a milestone moment if you will, what are we looking like as far as time line here. do we look at this is moving quickly as we have seen the last four days or so? i think we are ahead of schedule. it may finish up sooner than that. the prosecution have been telling a story. they started off with the luxury items that manafort purchased and they brought on some bookkeepers and tax preparers to give some hints. rick gates are going to take the jury inside the operation and talk about why potentially manafort needed to commit these crimes. they are desperate for cash when they are golden goose. and so yes, you are absolutely right. and we ll have to see what the defense does. ken dilanian, thank you my friend, we ll see you back in this program tomorrow. let me bring in our attorney, partner at golden gregory, he s represented three white house employees including the clinton s scandal. thank you for being on. thank you. rick gates have lied to the fed that s why he s in such trouble. what do you make of the prosecution of defense strategy here. it is as simple cross-examination to gates. you met with mueller with the fbi, yes. are you under oath now? yes. you are saying something consiste inconsistent with that. which is it? it gives the defense an opportunity to derirty up the case. it gives them the opportunity to defend manafort effectively. you have a paper case and for bank fraud and tax fraud, the evidence is very strong. now and the washington post is right about this. gates testimony against manafort, both men made millions of dollars as political consultants. time after time manafort obstructing gates to lie and many of those lies were crimes. if the jury agrees, manafort can spend the rest of his life in pris prison. do you believe this? manafort told gates to lie or aided or inspiring, he s in serious jeopardy. he l he ll admit that he lied and he ll say now i am telling the truth and this paper to corroborate what he s saying so the hope on behalf of mueller that the jury will be more believable than before. so gates still faces jail time or prison time. how likely is that? what does he have to prove or say here? he ll go to jail for a lot less time for anyone convicted at trial. he ll get a 5-k one sentencing production. this is just one case but gates stayed on in the campaign and certain linly knows a lot more. jeff, thank you very much for coming on and talk to us. thank you. we are turning to breaking news, iran is getting hit with the wave of financially crippling sanctions. step one of the trump administration as it unravels with the deal of the regime that the u.n. and security counsel negotiated. there is now a ban on the i am part of persian carpets and pistachio and a ban of exports of commercial airplanes. we ll be watching for this reaction. our senior administration official told nbc news that the president has been clear, none of this needs to happen. he ll meet with iranian leadership to discuss a comprehensive deal that ll contain their regional deny p conditions and their malign behavior and deny them any path to a nuclear weapon. joining me now wendy sherman, reaching the obama era of iran nuclear agreement. how . thank you. they have already left iran because they saw the writing on the wall. the sanctions will come into play in november to stop the importation of iranian oil and say you can t deal with american banks if you deal with the central bank of iran. i think that it will be very hard to keep the deal together even though you want to. i think iran is going to rely on china to probably hurt some of those sanctions. this idea as you heard from the senior officials who were on this call with reporters saying there is hope for the president to re-negotiate a deal. it sounds simply but not likely. iran is a resistance culture and i think we ll hear president rouhani try to rally and yes, we ll talk to the united states only if they ll stop their bullying tactics. trying to do a comprehensive deal to cover tefeverything mea the united states may have to put for on the table, maybe our primary embargo or we ll trade off what we need to do to ensure iran does not get new weapons against its behavior in the middle east and that ll not make secure in any of them. we heard on the administration on this and there were some push back where they are pushing for regime change. sarah sanders from the podium have hinted at or not out right declare. do you buy that push back. do you think the administration does not want the regime change or serves the u.s. best interest? i do think they want regime change. they think that these economics sanctions will hurt the iranian economy that the iranian people will rise up. there is some sporatic protests but those were going on long before the president pulled out of the deal. iran just changed its central bank governor and they have to do some changes to the economy. they just floated their currency exchange rules so the currency of iran can rise again since it did not lost a great deal of its value. there is no question that president rouhani has a lot coming at him and the iranian people certainly wish for a better future. i think they also have as a regime tremendous control mechanism to put down protests and so it is going to be a long time before we see regime change so i can imagine the administration says that s not there desire because getting there is not something likely to happen. ambassador, wendy ser mherma. we are waiting to see what president rouhani has to say and we ll bring it to you the second we get it. president trump in sasulting lebron james and dragging michael jordan into the conversation, too. we are talking about it live in somerville, new jersey. we ll be back. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn s treatment isn t working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach. it is a one-on-one like lebron has never seen, not a player but the president taking him on. several athletes have ran to james defense. the first lady, looks like lebron james is working to do good things on behalf of our next generation. her spokesperson went onto say the first lady is opened to visit james newly created i promise school in ohio. in an interview of don lemon, lebron said this. i noticed that the last few months he kind of used sports to divide us. that s something i can t relate to. sports is something that always bring someone together. if you thought the president could resist responding, you would be wrong. here it is if you missed it. lebron james is interviewed by the dumbest man on television, he made lebron looks smart which is not easy to do. i like mike which seems to be a reference of the debate of which player is the greatest of all time. is the president fanning the flames of what is seen as a cultural war. joining me now or political consultant, thank you both for being on. this is basketball and politics and culture and all comes together in this. we have seen nba players and people into the broader community spear of the back and forth between the president and lebron. the first of which the nba is by far all the professional sports socially active sports. that goes back to decades, bill russell and akron did not start with lebron, it goes back with many, many years. nba players are encouraged to be socially active. if you remember after travon martin, the miami heat players came out wearing hoodies. several nba players and donovan mitchell and all stepped up and defended lebron james. if you notice that trump sent out his tweet, lebron james did not send anything about it. he does not need anyone to defend him. he s doing quite fine. but, it is a difference in the league. the nfl, the players they come out and they re activist and they re essentially punished for it in a way. if you look at colin kaepernick in the nba it is encouraged and it is not surprise to see so many nba players stepping up to defend lebron james. lebron did respond to the president and he just tweeted about his school and he showed pictures of the school that he s been working on. he didn t throw elbow, he ignored the president s insults. when you look at the way the president used to talk about lebron, it used to be different. years ago he tweeted of what a great guy he was and great player. that was then and before the 2016 campaign when lebron came out and backed hillary clinton. do you think for the president s base supporters, lebron is going to have an impact, do you think it will be difference how they view? i don t think so. there is a reason why the president keeps ongoing back to these racial and cultural issues. this does resonate with those particular individuals. i think it relates to race and culture and there are a lot of issues in our country that we have to use this analogy and swept them under the rug. we know they still exist. here comes trump lifts the rug off the floor and what happens? it spreads like wildfires. it is unfortunately, when you are the elected leader, you have the expectation that the leaders are going to lead all the people. unfortunately, the president is not doing that. go ahead. i was going to add, one thing i want to add here, this is not about lebron james intelligence. when you hear something like shut up and dribble from laura ingram or lebron james should stick to basketball. it is about disagreement. if lebron james came out and said donald trump is the greatest president in the world, you would not hear things like they should stick to basketball. last year donald trump used the endorsement with mike tyson and he had paul o neill and jack nicholas endorsed trump and trump was proud of that. donald trump does not have a problem of athlete activism provided on his behalf. there are a lot of individuals who are not minorities that said negative things about president trump. when you talk about intellect that goes back to the 1930s and 1940s where a racist individual would attack americablack ameri that we are less than. i don t buy that argument. thank you for this conversation. we ll talk about it. nfl season kicks into high-gear the next few weeks. thank you for being on. more primaries are happening all across the country. voters in michigan are seeing double. two sisters are running for office. not just two sisters, they are twins. that s really where the similarities stuck. do you think president trump is doing a good job? i do. i do. we try to cross my eyes on that. no. morgan radford is joining us from that story. president trump is getting out of d.c. this week so we decided to go with him in somerville, new jersey. these feet. .raised a good sport. .and became a second-generation firefighter. but i couldn t bear my diabetic nerve pain any longer. so i talked to my doctor, and he prescribed lyrica. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions, suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worse depression, unusual changes in mood or behavior, swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling, or blurry vision. common side effects: dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain and swelling of hands, legs, and feet. don t drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don t drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who have had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. now i have less diabetic nerve pain. ask your doctor about lyrica. about medicare and supplemental insurance. medicare is great, but it doesn t cover everything - only about 80% of your part b medicare costs, which means you may have to pay for the rest. that s where medicare supplement insurance comes in: to help pay for some of what medicare doesn t. learn how an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by united healthcare insurance company might be the right choice for you. a free decision guide is a great place to start. call today to request yours. so what makes an aarp medicare supplement plan unique? well, these are the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp and that s because they meet aarp s high standards of quality and service. you re also getting the great features that any medicare supplement plan provides. for example, with any medicare supplement plan you may choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. you can even visit a specialist. with this type of plan, there are no networks or referrals needed. also, a medicare supplement plan goes with you when you travel anywhere in the u.s. a free decision guide will provide a breakdown of aarp medicare supplement plans, and help you determine the plan that works best for your needs and budget. call today to request yours. let s recap. there are 3 key things you should keep in mind. one: if you re turning 65, you may be eligible for medicare - but it only covers about 80% of your medicare part b costs. a medicare supplement plan may help pay for some of the rest. two: this type of plan allows you to keep your doctor - as long as he or she accepts medicare patients. and three: these are the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp. learn more about why you should choose an aarp medicare supplement plan. call today for a free guide. sister act, kind of. two candidates, twins, running for the same position but for different parties. nbc s morgan radford went to speak with them and be people who support them. we ve seen the political debate heating up on the campaign trail, at the dinner table, even within our own families. that s why this one pair of twin sisters who couldn t be more opposite on the political spectrum are showing there s room for a little love even at the peak of debate. so this is your district and this is your district? that s my district. with just hours until the election, monica sparks and jessica an tyson are competing for county commissioner. same position, different parties with one big thing in common. they re twins. do you think president trump is doing a good job? i do. i do. i i wish i could cross my eyes on that. no. for monica, it s running as a democrat. can i get your vote august second? just beside her jessica is running in the 13th district as a republican. monica was always there for me. she was the only one that i had. we are the people that call each other every morning. you re so used to being on the same team. yes. it s hard being on different teams? yes. worn to a mother addicted to ha heroin, they suffered in the foster care system until they were adopted at 8. i remember eating out of trash cans trying to find food. that s why i know there were issues. i dealt with those. i could have been a cog in the wheel, so to speak, and when i look at the democracy party, we re trying to address that. and how did your childhood affect you wanting to become a republican? i had to apply for welfare, but as soon as i had the opportunity to get a better job, to take care of my business and save a couple of pennies on the side, i went and turned in that welfare card. although they re still split over the biggest issues of the day we need to have a solution. and this hard fought swing state, voters say they re glad to see any bridge over the political divide. i think it s wonderful. reporter: why? that they can have opposite opinions and still be sisters and still get along as sisters. you should have different views and as long as you re educated and you have your own reasonings of why you re a democrat or why you re a republican, fine. you should be able to talk about it. reporter: talk about it and agree to disagree. i m not going to try to convert her hallelujah. and he s not going to convert me. reporter: no matter what your politics, they say, the left wing and the right wing are both part of the same bird. so interestingly voters there said they feel like the political discourse in washington was trickling down to those individual voters especially there in the heartland where they re headed to the critical polls in swing states, and they said it s time to bring back civility to politics just like these twin sisters. kind of an incredible story, morgan. i love that one of them is in red and one is in blue. you visualize the divide. morgan, thank you very much. we ll be right back with today s big picture. people with type s are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? (vo) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (vo) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ozempic®! ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don t reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! (vo) ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you. so let s promote our summer travel deal on choicehotels.com like this. surfs up. earn a $50 gift card when you stay just twice this summer. or, badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com yeah, i got some financialbody guidance a while ago. how d that go? he kept spelling my name with an i but it s bryan with a y. yeah, since birth. that drives me crazy. yes. it s on all your email. yes. they should know this? yeah. the guy was my brother-in-law. that s ridiculous. well, i happen to know some people. do they listen? what? they re amazing listeners. nice. guidance from professionals who take their time to get to know you.
thank you, mr. chairman. welcome, everyone, to the last gasp of the russia collusion conspiracy theory. as democrats continue to voice this expect tackle on the american people as well as you, mr. mueller, the american people may recall the media first began spreading this conspiracy theory in the spring of 2016 when fusion gps, funded by the dnc and the hillary clinton campaign started developing the steele dossier, a question of outlandish accusations that trump and his associates were russian agents. fusion gps, steele and other confederates fed these theorys to naive reporters and top officials in numerous government agencies, including the fbi, department of justice and the state department. among other things, the fbi used dossier allegations to obtain a warranty to spy on the trump campaign. despite acknowledging dossier allegations as being salacious and unverified, former fbi director james comey briefed those allegations to president obama and president-elect trump. those briefings conveniently leaked to the press, resulting in the publication of the dossier and launching thousands of false press stories based on the word of a foreign ex-spy, one who admitted he was desperate that trump lose the election and who was eventually fired as an fbi source for leaking to the press. after comey was fired, by his own admission, he leaked derogatory information to the press and successfully so of engineering the appointment of a special counsel, who sits here before us today. the fbi investigation was marred by further corruption and abuses. top official bruce orr, who his own wife worked on fusion gps s anti-trump operation, fed steele s information to the fbi, even after the fbi fired steele. top fbi investigator and his lover, another top fbi official constantly texted about how much they hated trump and wanted to stop him from being elected. and the entire investigation was opened, based not on intelligence but on a tip from a foreign politician about a conversation involving a maltese diplomat widely portrayed as a russian agent but seems to have far more connections with western governments, including our own fbi and our own state department than with russia. braisingly ignoring all these red flags, as well as the transparent absurdity of the claims they re making, democrats have argued for nearly three years that evidence of collusion is hidden just around the corner. like the lochness monster, they insist it s there, even if no one can find it. consider this. in march 2017, democrats on this committee said they had more than circumstantial evidence of collusion, but they couldn t reveal it yet. mr. mueller was soon appointed and they said he would find the collusion. then when no collusion was found and mr. mueller s indictments, the democrats said we would find it in his final report. then when there was no collusion in the report, we were told attorney general barr was hiding it. then when it was clear barr wasn t hiding anything, we were told it will be revealed through a hearing with mr. mueller himself. and now that mr. mueller is here, they re claiming that the collusion has actually been in his report all along. hidden in plain sight. and they re right. there is collusion in plain sight. collusion between russia and the democratic party. the democrats cloouded with russian sources to develop the steele dossier, russian lawyer gnat ala veselnitskaya cloouded with glenn simpson. through interviews and usual anonymous statements to reporters that today s hearing is not about getting information at all. they said they want to, quote, bring the mueller report to life and create a television moment through ploys, like having mr. mueller recite passages from his own report. this is political theater, hail mary attempt to convince the american people that collusion is real and that it s concealed in the report. granted, that s a strange argument to make about a report that is public. it s almost like the democrats prepared arguments, accusing mr. barr of hiding the report and didn t bother to update their claims once he published the entire thing. among congressional democrats, the russian investigation was never about finding the truth. it s always been a simple media operation by their own accounts, this operation continues in this room today. once again, numerous pressing issues this committee needs to address are put on hold to indulge the political fantasies of people who believed it was their destiny to deserve hillary clinton s administration. it s time for the curtain to close on the russia hoax, the conspiracy theory is dead. at some point, i would argue, we re going to have to get back to work. until then, i yield back the balance of my time. to ensure fairness and make sure that our hearing is prompt, i know we got a late start, director mueller, the hearing will be structured as follows. each member of the committee will be afforded five minutes to ask questions, beginning with the chair and ranking member. as chair, i will recognize thereafter in alternating fashion and descending order members of the majority and minority. as each member is asked his or her questions, the ranking member will be afforded an additional five minutes, followed by the chair, who will an additional five minutes for questions. ranking member and the chair will not be permitted to delegate or yield our final round of questions to any other member. after six members of the majority and six members of the minority have concluded their five-minute rounds of questions, we ll take a five or ten-minute break. we understand you ve requested before resuming the hearing with congressman swalwell, starting his round of questions. special counsel mueller is accompanied today by aaron zebley, who served as deputy special counsel from may 2017 until may 2019 and had day-to-day oversight of the investigation. mr. zebley resigned end of may 2019 when the special counsel s office was closed. both mr. mueller and mr. zebley will be available to answer questions today and will be sworn in, consistent with the rules of the house and the committee. mr. mueller and mr. zebley s appearance is in keeping with the committee s longstanding practice of receiving testimony from current or former department of justice and fbi personnel regarding open and closed investigative matters. as this hearing is under oath and before we begin your testimony, mr. mueller and zebley, would you please rise and raise your right hands to be sworn? do you swear or affirm that the testimony you re about to give at this hearing is the whole truth and nothing but the truth? thank you. the record will reflect that the witnesses have been duly sworn. ranking member? thank you, mr. chair. i just want to clarify that this is highly unusual for mr. zebley to be sworn in. we re here to ask director mueller questions. he is here as counsel. our side is not going to be directing any questions to mr. zebley and we have concerns about his prior representation of hillary clinton campaign aide. i just want to voice that concern that we do have and won t be addressing any questions to mr. zebley today. i thank the ranking member. i realize as probably do mr. zebley that there is an angry man down the street who is not happy about your being here tod today, but it is up to this committee and not anyone else who will be allowed to be sworn in and testify and you are welcome as a private citizen to testify and members may direct their questions to whoever they choose. with that, director mueller, you are recognized for any opening remarks you would like to make. good afternoon, chairman schiff, ranking member nunes and members of the committee. i testified before the house judiciary committee this morning and asked that that opening statement be incorporated into the record here. without objection. unique jurisdiction and you are interested in further understanding the counterintelligence implications of our investigation. let me say a word about how we handled the potential impact of our investigation on counter intelligence matters. as we explained in our report, special counsel regulations effectively gave me the role of united states attorney. as a result, we structured our investigation around evidence for possible use in prosecution of federal crimes. we did not reach what you would call counterintelligence conclusions. we did, however, set up processes in the office to identify and pass counterintelligence information on to the fbi. members of our office periodically briefed the fbi about counterintelligence information. in addition, there were agents and analysts from the fbi who are not on our team, but whose job it was to identify counterintelligence information in our files and to disseminate that information to the fbi. for these reasons, questions about what the fbi has done with the counter intelligence information obtained from our investigation should be directed to the fbi. i also want to reiterate a few points that i made this morning. i am not making any judgments or offering opinions about the guilt or innocence in any pending case. it is unusual for a prosecutor to testify about a criminal investigation and given my role as a prosecutor, there are reasons why my testimony will necessarily be limited. first, public testimony could affect ongoing matters, limiting the disclosure of information to protect the fairness of the proceedings and consistent with longstanding justice department policy, it would be inappropriate for me to comment in any way that could affect an ongoing matter. second, the justice department has asserted privileges regarding information, decisions, on did ls going matters within the justice department and deliberations within our office. these are justice department privileges that i will respect. the department has released a letter, discussing the restrictions on my testimony. i, therefore, will not be able to answer questions about certain areas that i know are of public interest. for example, i am unable to address questions about the opening of the fbi s russia investigation, which occurred months before my appointment, or matters related to the so-called steele dossier. these matters are the subject of ongoing review by the department. any questions on these topics should, therefore, be directed to the fbi or the justice department. third, as i explained this morning, it is important for me to adhere to what we wrote in our report. the report contains our findings, analysis and the reasons for the decisions we made. we stated the results of our investigation with precision. i do not intend to summarize or describe the results of our work in a different way in the course of my testimony today. as i stated in may, i also will not comment on the actions of the attorney general or of congress. i was appointed as a prosecutor. and i intend to adhere to that role and to the department standards that govern. flienl as i said this morning over the course of my career, i ve seen a number of challenges to our democracy. the russian government s efforts to interfere in our election is among the most serious. i am sure that the committee agrees. now before we go to questions i want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by mr. lieu who said, and i quote, you didn t charge the president because of the olc opinion. that is not the correct way to say it. as we say in the report, and as i said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime. with that, mr. chairman, i m ready to answer questions. thank you, director mueller. i recognize myself for five minutes. director mueller, your report describes a sweeping and systematic effort by russia to influence our presidential election. is that correct? that is correct. and during the course of this russian interference in the election, the russians made outreach to the trump campaign, did they not? that occurred over the course of yeah, that occurred. it s also clear from your report that during that russian outreach to the trump campaign, no one associated with the trump campaign ever called the fbi to report it, am i right? i don t know that for sure. in fact, the campaign welcomed the russian help, did they not? i think we report in our report indications that that occurred, yes. the president s son said when he was approached on dirt about hillary clinton, the trump campaign would love it? that s generally what was said, yes. the president himself called on the russians to hack hillary s emails? there s a statement by the president in those general line lines. numerous times during the campaign, the president praised the releases of the russian-hacked emails through wikileaks? that did occur. your report found that the trump campaign planned, quote, a press strategy, communications campaign and messaging, unquote, based on that russian assistance. i am not familiar with that. that language comes from volume i, page 54. apart from the russians wanting to help trump win, several individuals associated with the trump campaign were also trying to make money during the campaign and transition, is that correct? that is true. paul manafort was trying to make money or achieve debt forgiveness from a russian oligarch? generally that is accurate. michael flynn was trying to make money from turkey? true. donald trump was trying to make millions from a real estate deal in moscow? to the extent you re talking about the hotel in moscow? yes. yes. when your investigation looked into these matters, numerous individuals lied? number of persons we interviewed in the investigation, it turns out, did lie. mike flynn lied? he was convicted of lying, yes. george papadopoulos was convict fd lying? true. paul manafort was convicted of lying? true. in fact, went so far as to encourage other people to lie? that is accurate. deputy rick gates lied? that is accurate. michael cohen, the president s lawyer, was indicted for lying. true. he lied to stay on message with the president? allegedly, by him. when donald trump called your investigation a witch hunt, that is also false, is it not? i like to think so, yes. your investigation is not a witch hunt, is it? it is not a witch hunt. when the president said the russian interference was a hoax, that was false, wasn t it? true. when he said it publicly, it was false. he did say it publicly that it was false, yes. when he told it to putin, that was false, too, wasn t it? that, i m not familiar with. when the president said he had no business dealings with russia, that was false, wasn t it? i m not going to go into the details of the report along those lines. when the president said he had no business dealings with russia, in fact, he was seeking to build a trump tower in moscow, was he not? i think there is some question about when this was accomplished. you would consider a billion dollar deal to build a tower in moscow to be business dealings. wouldn t you, mr. mueller? absolutely. in short your investigation found evidence that russia wanted to help trump win the election, right? generally, i think that would be accurate. russia informed campaign officials of that? i m not certain to what conversations you re referring to. intermediary informed papadopoulos that they could help in stolen emails? accurate. committed crimes in order to help donald trump. you re talking about the computer crimes charged in our case? yes. absolutely. the trump campaign officials built their strategy, their messaging strategy around those stolen documents? generally, that s true. and then they lied to cover it up? generally, that s true. thank you, mr. nunes. thank you. welco welcome, director. as a former fbi director, you would agree that the fbi is the world s most capable law enforcement agency? i would say we re yes. the fbi claims the counter intelligence investigation of the trump campaign began july 31st, 2016. but, in fact, it began before that. in june 2016 before the investigation officially opened, trump campaign associates carter page and steven miller, a current trump adviser, were invited to attend a symposium at cambridge university in july 2016. your office, however, did not investigate who was responsible for inviting them to this symposium. they also failed to interview an american citizen who organized the event and invited carter page to it. is that correct? can you repeat the question? whether or not you interviewed steven schraege who orged the cambridge those areas i m going to stay away from. the first trump associate to be investigated was general flynn. many allegations against him stem from false media reports that he had an affair with a cambridge academic, lokova, who was a russian spy. some of these allegations were made public in a 2017 article written by british historian christopher andrew. your report fails to reveal how or why andrew, and his collaborator, richard dearlove, head of mi-6 spread these allegations and you failed to interview svetlana lokova about these matters. is that correct? i m not going to get into those matters to which you refe refer. you had a team of 19 lawyers, 40 agents and unlimited budget. correct, mr. mueller? i would not say we had an unlimited budget. let s continue with the opening of the investigation, supposedly on july 31st, 2016. the investigation was not opened based on an official but based on a rumor by alex ander downer. volume i, page 89, your report describes him blandly as a representative of a foreign government. he was actually a long-time australian politician, not a military or intelligence official who previously arranged a $25 million donation to the clinton foundation and, has previous ties to dearlove. so, downer conveys a rumor he supposedly heard about a conversation between papadopoulos and mifsa, calling mifsa a russian agent, yet your report does not refer to him as a russian agent. he has extensive contacts with western governments and the fbi. for example, a recent photo of him standing next to boris johnson, the new prime minister of great britain. what we re trying to figure out here, mr. mueller, is if our nato allies or boris johnson have been compromised. comey says mifsin is a russian agent. you do not. do you stand by what s in the report? i stand by that which is in the report and not so necessarily with that which is not in the report. i want to return to mr. downer. he denies papadopoulos mentioned anything to him about hillary clinton emails and denies that he took that to papadopoulos. mifsin denies mentioning them to papadopoulos in the first place. how does the fbi know to continually ask papadopoulos about clinton s emails for the rest of 2016? even more strangely, your sentencing memo on papadopoulos blames him for hindering the arrest or detain mifsid, who waltzed in and out of the united states in december 2016. the u.s. media could find him. italian press found him. a supposed russian agent at the epicenter of the purported collusion conspiracy. he is the guy who knows about the hillary clinton emails and that the russians have them but the fbi failed to question him for half a year after aofficially opening the investigation. and then according to volume i, once mifsid was finally questioned he made false statements to the fbi. but you declined to charge him. is that correct? you did not indict mr. mifsin? i m not going to speak to the series of happenings as you articulate them. you did not indict mr. mifsin? the gentleman s time has expired. pardon? you did not indict mr. mifsid? true. mr. mueller, thank you for your perseverance and patience today. director, your report opens with two statements of remarkable clarity and power. the first statement is one that as of today is not acknowledged by the president of the united states. and that is, quote, the russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion. the second statement remains controversial amongst members of this body, same page on your report. i quote, the russian government perceived it would benefit from a trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome. do i have that statement right? i believe so. director mueller, this attack on our democracy involved, as you said, two operations. first, a social mediainformation campaign. this was a targeted campaign to spread false information on places like twitter and facebook. is that correct? that s correct. facebook estimated, as per your report, that the russian fake images reached 126 million people. is that correct? i believe that s the sum we recorded. director, who did the russian social media campaign ultimately intend to benefit, hillary clinton or donald trump? donald trump. the second operation let me say donald trump. there were instances where hillary clinton was subject to much the same behavior. the second operation was a scheme, what we call the hack and dump, to steal and release hundreds of thousands of emails from the democratic party and the clinton campaign. is that a fair summary? that is. did your investigation find that the releases of the hacked emails were strategically timed to maximize impact on the election? i would have to refer you to our report on that question. page 36, i quote, the release of the documents were designed and timed to interfere with the 2016 u.s. presidential election. mr. mueller, which presidential candidate was russia s hacking and dumping operation designed to benefit, hillary clinton or donald trump? mr. trump. is it possible that this sweeping and systematic effort by russia actually had an effect on the outcome of the presidential election? those issues are being or have been investigated by other entities. 126 million facebook impressions, fake rallies, attacks on hillary clinton s health. would you rule out it might have had some effect on the election? i m not going to speculate. mr. mueller, your report describes a third avenue of attempted russian interference. that is the numerous links and contacts between the trump campaign and individuals tied to the russian government. would you repeat that question? your report describes a third avenue of russian interference, links and contacts between the trump campaign and individuals tied to the russian government. yes. let s bring up slide one, which is about george papadopoulos. it reads on may 6, 2016, ten days after that meeting with mifsid, papadopoulos represented to representative of a foreign government that the trump campaign had received indications from the russian government it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information that would be damaging to hillary clinton. director, that s exactly what happened two weeks later, did it not? i can speak to the screen being accurate as what is in the report but not the second half of the question. on july 22nd through wikileaks, thousands of emails stolen by the russian government appeared, correct? that s on page six of the report. this is the wikileaks posting of those emails. i can t find it quickly but please continue. okay. so just to be clear, before the public or the fbi ever knew, the russians previewed for a trump campaign official, george papadopoulos that they had stolen emails they could release anonymously to help donald trump and hurt hillary clinton, correct? i m not going to speak to that. director, rather than report this contact with joseph mifsid and the notion that there was dirt that the campaign could use, rather than report that to the fbi, which most of my constituents would expect an individual to do, mr. papadopoulos lied about his russian contacts, correct? that s true. we have an election coming up in 2020, director. if a campaign receives an offer of dirt from a foreign individual or government, generally speaking, should that campaign report those contacts? should be. can be, depending on the circumstances, a crime. i will yield back the balance of my time. mr. conway? thank you. mr. mueller, did anyone ask you to exclude anything from your report that you felt should have been in the report? i don t think so but it s not a small report. i yield back the balance of my time. thank the gentleman for yooeding. good afternoon, director mueller. in your opening remark this is morning you made it pretty clear you wanted the special counsel report to speak for itself. you said that was the office s final position and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the president. you spent the last three hours of your life from democrats trying to get you to answer all kinds of hypotheticals about the president, and i suspect it might continue the next three hours of your life. i think you stayed pretty much true to what your intent and dire was, but regardless of that, the special counsel s office is closed and has no continuing jurisdiction or authority. what would be your authority or jurisdiction for adding new conclusions or determinations to the special counsel s written report? as to the latter, i don t know or expect changes in conclusions that we included in our report. some construed a change to the written report. you talked about the exchange you had with congressman lieu. i wrote it down a little bit different. i want the record to be perfectly clear. he asked you, quote, the reason you did not indict donald trump is because of the olc opinion stating you cannot indict a sitting president, to which you responded, that is correct. that response is inconsistent, i think you ll agree, with your written report. i want to be clear. it is not your intent to change your written report? it is your intent to clarify the record? as i start ed today, this afternoon, either a footnote or end note. what i wanted to clarify is that we did not make any determination with regard to culpability in any way. we did not start that process down the road. terrific. thank you for clarifying the record. a stated purpose of your appointment as special counsel was to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the russian government efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, as part of that full and thorough investigation, what determination did the special counsel office make about whether the steele dossier was part of the russian government efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election? again, when it comes to mr. steele, i defer to the department of justice. well, first of all, director, i very much agree with your determination that russia s efforts were sweeping and systematic. i think it should concern every american. that s why i want to know just how sweeping and systematic those efforts were. i want to find out if russia interfered with our election by providing false information through sources to christopher steele about a trump conspiracy that you determined didn t exist. well, again, i m not going to discuss the issues with regard to mr. steele. in terms of a portrayal of the conspiracies, we returned two indictments in the computer crimes arena. one gru and another active malaysias in which we lay out in excruciating detail what occurred in those two rather large conspiracies. i agree with respect to that. but why this is important is an application and three renewal applications were submitted by the united states government to spy or surveil on trump campaign associate carter page and the steele dossier was submitted as a central piece of evidence to that. the premise was that there was a well-developed conspiracy of cooperation between the trump campaign and russian government but the special counsel investigation didn t establish any conspiracy, correct? well, what i can tell you is that the events that you are characterizing here, now, is part of another matter that is being handled by the department of justice. but you did not establish any conspiracy, much less a well-developed one? again, i pass on answering that question. the special counsel did not charge carter page with anything, correct? special counsel did not. all right. my time is expired. i yield back. director mueller, i would like to turn your attention to the june 9th, 2016, trump tower meeting. slide two, which should be on the screen now, is part of an email chain between don junior donald trump jr. and a publicist, representing the son of a russian oligarch. the email exchange ultimately led to the now infamous june 9th, 2016, meeting. the email from the publicist to donald trump jr. reads in part, the crown prosecutor of russia offered to provide the trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate hillary and her dealings with russia and is part of russia and its government s support of mr. trump. in this email, donald trump jr. is being told that the russian government wants to pass along information which would hurt hillary clinton and help donald trump. is that correct? that s correct. now, trump junior s response to that email is slide three. he said, and i quote, if it is what you say, i love it. especially later in the summer. then donald junior invited senior campaign officials paul manafort and jared kushner to the meeting. did he not? he did. this email exchange is evidence of an offer of illegal assistance. is it not? i cannot adopt that characterization. isn t it against the law for a presidential campaign to accept anything of value from a foreign government? generally speaking, yes, but generally the cases are unique. you say in page 184 volume i that the federal campaign finance law broadly prohibits foreign nationals from making contributions, et cetera. and then you say that foreign nationals may not make a contribution or donation of money or anything of value. it says clearly in the report itself. thank you. now, let s turn to what actually happened at the meeting. when donald trump jr. and the others got to the june 9th meeting, they realized that the russian delegation didn t have the promised, quote, unquote, dirt. in fact, they got upset about that. did they not? generally, yes. you say in volume i, page 118, that trump junior asked what are we doing here? what do they have on clinton? and during the meeting kushner actually texted manafort saying it was a waste of time, quote, unquote. correct? i believe it s in the report along the lines you specify. to be clear top trump campaign officials learned that russia wanted to help donald trump s campaign by giving him dirt on his opponent. trump junior said, loved it. then he and senior officials held a meeting with the russians to try to get that russian help, but they were disappointed because the dirt wasn t as good as they had hoped. so, to the next step, did anyone, to your knowledge, in the trump campaign ever tell the fbi of this offer? i don t believe so. did donald trump jr. tell the fbi that they received an offer of help from the russians? that s about all i ll say on this aspect of it. wouldn t it be true, sir if, they had reported it to the fbi or anyone in that campaign during the course of your two-year investigation, you would have uncovered such a i would hope, yes. yes. sir, is it not the responsibility of political campaigns to inform the fbi if they receive information from a foreign government? i would think that is something they would and should do. not only did the campaign not tell the fbi, they sought to hide the existence of the june 9th meeting for over a year, is that correct? on the general characterization, i would question it. if you re referring to later initiative that flowed from the media, then no. what i m suggesting is that you said in volume ii, page 5, on several occasions the president directed aides to not publicly disclose the email setting up the june 9th meeting. yes, that s accurate. thanks. sir, given this illegal assistance by russians, you chose, even given that, you did not charge donald trump jr. or any of the other senior officials with conspiracy. is that right? correct. and while when you re talking about if you re talking about other individuals, you re talking about the attendees. that s right. of june 9th. that s right. even though you didn t charge them with conspiracy, don t you think that the american people would be concerned that these three senior campaign officials eagerly sought a foreign adversary s help in an election and don t you think that we set a precedent for future elections? i can t accept that kind of characterization. it seems like a betrayal of american values, to me, sir. if not being criminal it s definitely unethical and wrong and i would think we would not want to set a precedent that political campaigns would not want to divulge information to foreign adversarial governments. pursuant to regulations you submitted a confidential report to the attorney general at the conclusion of the investigation. what i would like you to confirm is the report that you did, that is the subject matter of this hearing was to the attorney general? yes. you also say you threw overboard the word collusion because it s not a legal term. you would not conclude because collusion was not a legal term? well, it depends how you want to use the word. in the general parlance, people can think of it that way. if you re talking about criminal statute arena, you can t, because some it s much more accurately described as conspiracy. right. your words are, it s not a legal term so you didn t put it in your conclusion, correct? that s correct. mr. mueller, i want to talk about your powers and authorities. the attorney general in the appointment order gave you powers and authorities that reside in the attorney general. the attorney general has no ability to give you powers and authority greater than the powers and authority of the attorney general, correct? i don t believe. yeah. i think that is correct. mr. mueller i want to focus on one word in your report. it s the second to the last word in the report. it s exonerate. the report states, accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it does not exonerate him. now, in the judiciary hearing, in your prior testimony, you ve already agreed with mr. ratcliffe that exonerate is not a legal term, that there is not a legal test for this i have a question for you, mr. mueller. does the attorney general have the power or authority to exonerate? what i m putting up here is the united states code. this is where the attorney general gets his power, and the constitution, and the annotated cases of these. we even went to your law school i went to case western but i thought maybe your law school teaches it differently. we got the criminal law textbook from your law school. mr. mueller, nowhere in these because we had them scanned, is there a process or description on exonerate. there s no office of exoneration at the attorney general s office, no certificate at the bottom of his desk. mr. mueller, would you agree with me that the attorney general does not have the power to exonerate? i m going to pass on that. why? because it embroils us in a legal discussion. i m not prepared to deal with a legal discussion in that arena. mr. mueller, you would not disagree with me when i say that there is no place that the attorney general has the power to exonerate? he has not been given that authority. i take your question. great. the one thing that i guess is that the attorney general probably knows that he can t exonerate either. and that s the part that kind of confuses me. if the attorney general doesn t have the power to exonerate, then you don t have the power to exonerate. and i believe he knows he doesn t have the power to exonerate. so this is the part i don t understand. if your report is to the attorney general and the attorney general doesn t have the power to exonerate and he does not he knows that you do not have that power, you don t have to tell him that you re not exonerating the president. he knows this already. so then that kind of changes the context of the report. no. we included in the report for exactly that reason. he may not know it. he should know it. you believe that attorney bill barr believes that somewhere in the hallways of the department of justice there s an office of exoneration? no, that s not what i said. i believe he knows. and i don t believe you put that in there for mr. barr. i think you put that in there for exactly what i m going to discuss next. the washington post yesterday when speaking of your report, the article said trump could not be exonerated of trying to obstruct the investigation itself. trump could not be exonerated. that statement is correct, mr. mueller, isn t it, in that no one can be exonerated? the reporter who wrote this, this reporter can t be exonerated. mr. mueller, you can t be exonerated. in our criminal justice system there is no power or authority to exonerate. this is my concern, mr. mueller. this is the headline on all the news channels while you were testifying today. mueller, trump was not exonerated. mr. mueller, what you know is that this can t say mueller exonerated trump. because you don t have the power or authority to exonerate trump. you have no more power to declare him exonerated than you have the power to declare him anderson cooper. the problem i have here is that since there s no one in the criminal justice system who has that power, the president pardons, he doesn t exonerate. courts and juries don t declare innocent, they declare not guilty. the statement about exoneration is misleading and meaningless and colors this investigation. one word out of the entire portion of your report and it s a meaningless word that has no legal meaning and it has colored your entire report. the time of the gentleman has expired. mr. carson? thank you, chairman. thank you, director mueller, for your years of service to our country. i want to look more closely, sir, at the trump campaign chairman paul manafort, an individual who i believe betrayed our country, lied to the grand jury, tampered with witnesses and who repeatedly tried to use his position with the trump campaign to make more money. let s focus on the betrayal and greed. your investigation, sir, found a number of troubling contacts between mr. manafort and russian individuals before and after the campaign. is that right, sir? right. correct. in addition to the june 9th meeting just discussed, manafort also met several times with a man named konstantin kilimnik, who was found to have ties to the russian government. correct. he didn t just meet with him but shared private trump campaign polling information with this man linked to russian intelligence. is that correct, sir? that is correct. in return, the information was shared with a russian oligarch tied to vladimir putin. is that correct, sir? allegedly. director mueller, meeting with him wasn t enough. sharing internal polling information wasn t enough. mr. manafort went so far as to offer this russian oligarch tied to putin a private briefing on the campaign. is that right, sir? yes, sir. and, finally, mr. manafort also discussed internal campaign strategy on four battleground states, michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania and minnesota. the russian intelligence linked individual. did he not, sir? that s reflected in the report, as were the items you listed previously. director mueller, based on your decades of years of experience at the fbi, would you agree, sir, it creates a national security risk when a presidential campaign sharm shares private polling information on the american people? private political strategy related to winning the votes of the american people and private information about american battleground states with a foreign adversary? is that the question, sir? yes, sir. i m not going to speculate along those lines. to the extent it s within the lines of the report, i support it. anything beyond that is not part of that which i would support. i think it does, sir. i think it shows an infuriating lack of patriotism from the very people seeking the highest office in the land. director mueller, manafort didn t share this information in exchange for. i can t answer that question without knowing more about the questio question. it s clear he was hoped to be paid back money he was owed by russian olgarchs for the passing of campaign information. that true. as my colleague, mr. heck, will discuss later, greed corrupts. sharing private campaign information in exchange for money represents a particular kind of corruption, one that presents a national security risk to our country, sir? i m not going to reply on that. i don t have the expertise in that arena to really opine. would you agree, sir, manafort s contacts with russians close to vladimir putin and his efforts to exchange private information on americans for money left him vulnerable to blackmail by the russians? generally so, i think that would be the case. would you agree, sir, these acts demonstrated a betrayal of the democratic values our country rests on? i can t agree with that. not that it s not true, but i cannot agree with it. yes, sir. director mueller, in my years of experience as a law enforcement officer and a member of congress, fortunate to serve on the intel committee, i know enough to say yes. trading political secrets for money with a foreign adversary can corrupt and can leave you open to blackmail. it certainly represents a betrayal of the values underpinning our democracy. thank you for your service again, director mueller. appreciate you coming today. i yield back my time. dr. winstrop? thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. mueller, for being here today. is it accurate to say your investigation found no evidence that members of the trump campaign were involved in the theft or publication of clinton campaign-related emails? can you read or can you repeat the question? is it accurate to say your investigation found no evidence that members of the trump campaign were involved in the theft or publication of the clinton campaign-related emails? i don t know. well volume i, page 5, the investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinate ed with the russian government in its election interference activities. so, it would, therefore, be inaccurate, based on this to describe that finding as open to doubt, that finding being that trump campaign was involved with theft or publication of the clinton campaign emails. are you following that? i do believe i m following it, but it is that portion, that matter does not fall or fall within our investigation. basically what your report says, volume i page 5. open to doubt is how the committee democrats describe this finding in their minority views in a 2018 report. and it kind of flies in the face of what you have in your report. the investigation found no documentary evidence that george papadopoulos told anyone affiliated with the trump campaign about claims that the russians had dirt on candidate clinton? let me turn that over to mr. i d like to ask you, sir, this is your report, that s what i m basing this on. can you repeat it. ? the investigation found no documentary evidence that george papadopoulos told anyone affiliated with the trump campaign about joseph misfit s claims that the russians had dirt on candidate clinton. if it appears in the report, it s accurate. in the report it says no documentary evidence that papadopoulos shared this information with the campaign. it s inaccurate to conclude that by the time of the june 9, 2016 tower meeting, the campaign was likely already on notice via george papadopoulos s contact that russia in fact had damaging information on trump s opponent. would you say that that is an inaccurate to say it s likely already i direct you to the report. i appreciate that, the democrats jump to this conclusion, which contradicts what you have in your report. i have a number of statements i d like you to clarify. president trump was a russian agent after your report was publicly released. that statement is not supported by your report, correct? that is accurate. multiple members have asserted that manafort met with julian assange. because your report does not mention finding evidence that manafort met with assange, i would assume that means you found no evidence of this meeting, is that assumption correct? i m not sure i agree with that assumption. but you make no mention of it in your report? yes, i would agree with that. does your report contain any evidence that president trump was enrolled in the russian system as a member of this committee once claimed? . what i can speak to is evidence that we picked up as the special counsel. thank you, i appreciate that. did you ask the department of just is to expand the scope of the special counsel s mandate august 20th, 2017 scoping peo e memoran memoranda? without looking at the memoranda, i could not answer that did you ever make a request to expand your office s mandate at all? generally, yes. and was that ever denied? i m not going to speak to that. it goes into internal deliberations. i m trying to understand process, is expanding the scope am coulding from the acting attorney general or rosenstein or does it come from you, or can it come from either? i m not going to discuss any other alternatives. thank you, mr. mueller. thank you, mr. chairman. mr. mueller, i think i can say without fear of contradiction that you re the greatest patriot in this room today, and i want to thank you for being here. thank you. you said in your report, and i m going to quibble with your words that the russia system was sweeping and systematic. ity think it was an invasion. i don t think it was sweeping and systematic, i think it was sinister and scheming. having said that, one of my colleagues referred to this russian intervention as a hoax. i d like to get your comment on that you talk about the internet research agency. and how tens of millions of u.s. persons became engaged with the posts that they made, there were some 80,000 posts on facebook that facebook itself admitted 126 million people have probably seen the posts that were put up by the internet research agency. they had 3800 twitter accounts. and had designed more than 75,000 tweets that reached 1.4 million people. the internet research agency was spending about $1.25 million a month on all of this social media in the united states in what i would call an invasion in our country. would you agree that it was not a hoax? that the russians were engaged in trying to impact our election? absolutely, it was not a hoax. the indictments we returned against the russians were substantial in their scope using the scope we re in. and i think one of the we have underplayed to a certain extent that aspect of our investigation that has and would have long term damage to the united states that we need to move quickly to address. thank you for that. i d like to drill down on that a little more. the internet research agency actually started in 2014 by sending over staff as tourists, i guess, to start looking at where they wanted to engage. there are many that suggest and i m interested in your opinion as to whether or not russia is presently in the united states looking for ways to impact the 2020 election. that would be in levels of class and communication. let me ask you this. often times when we engage in these hearings, we forget the forest for the trees. you have a very large report here of over 400 pages, most americans have not read it. we have read it, the fbi director yesterday said he hadn t read it, which is discouraging, but on behalf of the american people, i want to give you 1:39 to tell the american people what you would like them to glean from this report. well, i we spent substantial time ensuring the integrity of the report. it also is a signal, a flag to those of us who have some responsibility in this area to exercise those responsibilities swiftly and don t let this problem continue to linger as it has over so many years. all right. you didn t take the whole amount of time, i m going to yield the rest of my time to the chairman. i thank the gentle woman for yielding. director mueller, i wanted to ask you about conspiracy. generally a conspiracy requires an offer of something illegal, acceptance of that offer and an overt act and further answer of it, is that correct? correct. don junior was aware that the russians were offering dirt on his opponent, correct? i don t know that for sure, but one would assume. when you say that you would love to get that help, that would constitute acceptance of the offer? it s a wide open request. and it would certainly be evidence of acceptance, when you say, i would love it, that would be considered evidence of an acceptance. you stay away from any one or two particular situations. this particular situation, i ll have to continue in a bit i now yield to mr. stewart. i do have a series of important questions for you, before i do that. i want to take a moment to emphasize something my friend mr. turner has said. no person is above the law. many times they had not even the president which is i think is blazingly obvious to most of us. i m having a problem hearing you, sir. i agree with this statement, that no person is above the law, there s another principle we have to defend and that is it the presumption of innocence. i think the way that your office phrased some parts of your report, it makes me wonder, i
forced. into the world of old people suffering from hunger in the. world food program was fighting over worldwide. to. join the fight. this is news africa coming up in the next 15 minutes a gesture from the germans and not a faint blue to be clearly listed the late 19th century is finally on its way back to namibia we are the effect goes far enough. to be on ses lovelace had to africa the pop moguls new album inspired by the lion king is out today it features multiple african artists and produces but some east africans feel excluded. and. i m kristie window welcome to news africa i m glad you re today and a stone cross saluted from namibia by german colonialist in the late 19th century is finally on its way back a german museum agreed to repair trade the stone cross off cape cross in may now germany says it s committed to coming to terms with its colonial past berlin is negotiating with the in the movie and government over the terms of an apology for its genocide committed against the head a little and nama peoples in the early 20th century germany has already returned a number of skulls of indigenous people removed from the movie a jury in colonial rule now the return of the cross marks a mother concrete step to make good germany s page to accelerate the return of the facts and human remains from former african colonies. cape cross and there are headland on the south atlantic coast has few human inhabitants but hundreds of thousands of seals it s a nature reserve that draws many visitors but most are unaware of the area s historical importance this is a replica of the stone cross built by portuguese seafarers more than 500 years ago the original was stolen by german colonialists in the late 1900 is explained in a hotel museum near by. life and tell manager comes the latest developments in this story. proves this where everything starts so if you can understand it you ve got the or reaching out and know it can also teach the children that what transpired in the. you know they feel you know we re still reaching them. us from the start so i think it s going to be it s going to play a very nature only if we do if they will be i think it will live in major boost. after years of effort than a 1000000 government has retrieved the cultural property stolen by germany during its colonial occupation in the capital when talk at the namibian independence museum on the lookout for the most recently returned items and a bible belonging to hendrick with boy and ethnic now ma who was killed fighting the gym after several requests by the namibian government and the bible were returned in february of this year but they are nowhere to be seen at this national independence museum. the museum director takes us to a secret well secured room hears with voice with which should be displayed in the future museum at the site of his former residence in the village of clear be on more than 300 kilometers from the capital but no one knows when it will be built for now the whip along with boys bible is stored away from public view. they miss the state bruce is not delivered in terms of the security in the room where it can be displayed in. what month it was we were mandated at the decision to just have to store it we do not want to do one thing while the other community will not be here so the community must grow big and come up with one voice to say this is what we want local media reported on a dispute among the boys descendants some of them say both the whip and bible belong to the family not the government lucy of it boy is torn she s part of the vote for families and the government. the family feel that it should be in the museum because it s not we cannot own him he s a year all in namibia for the namibian people so therefore the family feel that it should stay the national museum but one day if there is a museum in that regional i temp must come to be on this and probably within the family that this different billions of odds which happen to the i know that they did you will ask me that question but leave that question for the family. museum director with c.c. has been compiling a list of namibian odd works that are still overseas she wants to recover more stolen property but she s learned from the experience that it takes a lot of time and communication to set the right everyone involved in the process can t be rushed back at cape cross it s not yet clear if the 15th century original will stand here once more or if it s too will end up in the museum. for more on this i m joined by yes a little room oral he is the founder of an n.g.o.s here in berlin that focuses on the patch ration of items that interest artifacts and human remains looted from colonized countries welcome to teach every african missed important until we see that the that the germans have the gesture in what do you make of them retaining the cape crossed in the movie of course this follows they were off the boys by the end with what do you make of that gesture and really doing to make the most difficult about it because for me the tourists symbolizes christianity and the we know the christians especially the catholics and the lutherans there were there once who really prepared their way for this. and. this is the christians they are the ones who told us we do have to believe or know on cultures traditions and customs because that is see what is sort of their way of god but the flame did they were there once who did you really prepare their way. mikita easier for the troops to. ok speaking off the colonial era as some of the things that happened there this week we heard from a very high ranking german official here speaking to me and i just want to read out the quote he said here that the horrors that germans committed at the beginning of the 20th century against the people of this country was very refreshing in the especially the head a little and nama are on full caution the atrocities committed in germany s name well what today would be court genocide so we hearing this would genocide we re hearing what sounds like an admission does that go far enough. and do my part to those in the media present in the area unama we have been demanding to the gym and government to a daughter called nies war to end between an awful in 1000 or 8 to was dui genocide and did nothing. up to now the whole of the typical denies that it is publicly just one of the d.v.d. did locate the beauty god did it as a general side i think there s never been a moment in the parliament just to read you mind in that it to must be officially announced in the parliament and today hope to apologize to probably the reparations ok so as i as i put it out of us when we started this conversation you are you ll enjoy focuses on the repatriation of human remains and artifacts looted from colonized countries you ve been doing this for i think 3 j.k. it s now you so passionate about it it s you ve dedicated your life to doing this work and i wondered why this is something that you re so passionate about. since i was a child individual for years my grandmother used to tell me stories over the milly chief men who fought against the jim and colonialism and then at the end he was a defeated and then he was that them as a prisoner of war and he was a hen for more than 7 hours where you find him a grandmother says he was so strong 7 hours he didn t die then the german short at him but spit i him through and the lies that they did to put and not somewhere there just wanted to torture him some people to shoot the elf to see what is in me if they do the blood is the germans the 7 is good to be applied so my good mother has been us the hen. of the who was hen they chopped off the head and said to each to jim one for this is the search as and it is t.v. here somewhere here in german and my grandmother and the people we re where come from they ve been to many of these to be brought back even to do believe with this is a scam all to claw conditions are changing it isn t because you haven t a body to him. ok so this is your personal story and you re fighting for the remains of field and fathers who have actually to fax to tanzania yeah that s sort of them bora thank you so much so we appreciate your time sir. the pop icon beyonce his new album was released today and it s proving to be a hits in africa the 14 track album titled lion king the gift was inspired by disney s new version of the classic film now on the album s beyond say features nigerian pop stars including give me a laddie and whisk it through me. asking they re also artists from ghana and south africa. so we took our cameras to the streets of lagos to get some reviews of queen bees latest record but if you say something really beat that record before. a musician you feel how warm chords you also feel so to save time i am well i think if you read their fear in her written after hours to double to see green lion king give you reason i got 3 or 3 will that work i think is a good step anyway for someone like her or his progress is very good so i don t ok i think that i now for the same period and i mean the song and i m thinking this i think if you actually boost i think it s a show and i really think industry i mean if you stab ok so the album has made some criticism of the especially due to the lack of eastern african voices on the recordings set out session from nairobi rhodes i m a huge beyond safe and but i m still gutted there was no intrusive ity in the lion king album even with the little swahili in the film it would have meant to large to have east african sound this was purely a west african affair once again we ve been brought sat and this use of roach it s worse that disney line king uses swahili but what s even worse is that he didn t feature any artist that speaks the language africa is more than just niger. it has 57 countries. and that is it one album day devaney s africa as always you can catch all our stories on our website and facebook page today will leave you with some sound from beyond say his latest album this one s called spirit till next time i bought it. again. and no one. seems. to keep you hit. you. when the man. not the kind of guy you. mean easy. enough to learn another. rise and shine time to cast off luke us is taking an outing welcome to my hamburg summer tour always pretty close to the water and there s plenty of it in this city. in the. next song t.w. . robots are still in the development phase soft stuff but what s going to happen when they grow. will schumann s academicians for you to peacefully co-exist. more for me on the verge of the lips. if we just bumble into this totally unprepared with our heads in the sand fusing to think about what could go wrong. then let s face it it s probably going to be the biggest mistake in human history. artificial intelligence is now spreading through our society. is this the beginning of
Partisanship and toxicity in the direction that hillary clinton takes. ity that, but in our own directn actually stand for what it stane a citizen of this country and stand for an actual alternative vision to that left-wing poison. and if i m being honest, if idoughhink we ve done a goo enough job of that yet. and that s what our work is cut out for us. thisfnd year. sean: d daily mail tip survey legitimate reveals 70% believesp that both candidates should undergo pharmaceuticaler screening. they face off in these debatesty and only 18% think drug tests are unnecessary. now, for 18 perc performing athe they get drug tested all the time. drug tested y you do it for pre, especially, you know, considering that what wehe witnessed on at the state of the union? i don t know. i don of tt know if it wasess, caffeine. i m not going to venture a guess. i m no, but itt certainly was not the guy we see every day. was itsee ever? no, it wasn t. but the reality is the american people deservee
Judge said if he violated the federal election law the federaa tax law falsifying business records as its ns s is necessary to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt as we not to be unanimous second he don t know which 1 ity was in number 3 and by the wayri all verdict sent to be unanimous number 3 a local da in a local county judge has no jurisdictiou over a felony crime. the so they were acting as federal prosecutors so the third as a third column federal election