From your times, unlike all of this today, Robert Mother finally testifies before collars declaring that his two year long investigation didn't exonerate President Trump and that Russia, we'll metal again. It's their estates July twenty feet below hey sorry, I was listening to Trump. What was using the terrible for Democrats? Are you eating or nurse none proper? What are you eating? Cookie might Schmidt covered mothers. Testimony four times

The judiciary committee will come to order it MIKE nuts actually talk about these hearings. You had warned us that Robert I would be very highly disciplined you'd be circumspect, and that he would more or less deliberately trying to be boring. So how did you start this day of hearings it mornings? never. As you know, in May twenty seventeen, the acting attorney general asked me. To serve a special council. Mahler starts with an opening statement add large Liese stays within the four square corners of his report- that the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign inspired by the russian government and its election interference activities. He lay

out what they found and given my role as a prosecutor, there are reasons why my testimony will necessarily be limited and as a warning to the house, members he's essentially saying you guys can try and get me to see the things that you want politically me to say, but employing icon asylum. I therefore will not be able to answer questions about certain areas that I know of public interest in in what we see at the end of his statement is a little peak. Did he gave us into his mind? Let me say one poor thing over the course of my career, I have seen a number of challenges to our democracy. The russian government's efforts to interfere in our election is among the most serious he's there, because there's three issues to talk about obstruction collusion,

and russian interference in the elections, and he shows at the end of that statement, the importance that the issue of russian interference has to him that it's the most more correct. As I said on, May twenty nine. This deserves the attention of every American. I came german mothers sort of signalling luck, rushing into Ference in the election in twenty. Sixteen was a huge deal and it could be a problem going forward. Please pay attention right and, of course, Democrats are in charge, of these hearings. So how did they start their questioning of mauler begin by recognising myself for five minutes so right off the bat Jerry Nan learn the chairman of the House, Judiciary Committee. Takes through a bunch of yes or no questions.

It showed that the president's statement about the Mahler investigations findings are inaccurate. The president is repeatedly claimed that your report found there was no obstruction and that it completely and totally exonerated him. That is not what your report said is corrected is not what the report says, and what about total exoneration? Did you actually totally exonerate? The present? ran those still exactly like what you had predicted. The Democrats wanted Mahler to say and what your Katya, who wrote the rules for the special council actually advised the Democrats to do yet in that potentially powerful political fodder heading into an election right, and it's also embrace of what the Democrats understand to be. This limited, restrained approach from Mahler Leather kind of working with what they ve got.

The other thing that mother had done was say that he was not going to read from the report. So the damn we're not even going to have the opportunity using mauler going through, document in his own voice. As a way of bringing this to live so their basically route, due to setting up yes or no questions that contrast between what Trump has said and what's actually in the report- and the second thing is that it leaves the Democrats as the store, retailers look at how do the Democrats work within those constraints,

their focusing on the greatest heads of the obstruction section of the report? My into your investigation found evidence that President Trump took steps to terminate the special council correct, correct the president's orders, dime again to deny that the present tried to fire the special council and many others. Is that correct? Yet, despite knowing the attorney general sessions was not supposed to involve investigation, the present still Friday. The attorney general to unrepealed himself after you were appointed special council that correct, if it's the same incidents that we ve been looking at for the past two years, but if you're the average person- and you have not ups- asked about these different incidents. Then, if you looked up at the television

On Wednesday morning, you were seeing an example of the presence behaviour, perhaps in a way that you hadn't before investigation, found substantial evidence that, when the president ordered Don began to fire, the special council and then lie about it. Donald Trump one committed and obstructive back to connected to an official proceeding. Three did so with corrupt and those are the elements of obstruction of justice. In the end they said of America. If the president had been anyone besides the President, he would have definitely been charged with obstruction of justice if anyone else had ordered a witness to create a false record and cover up acts that are the subject of a law enforcement investigation. That person would be facing criminal charges is

that any other person who engaged in such conduct would be charged with a crime? The point has been underscored many times, but I repeat it, no one! No one! No one is above the law is above, the law is above the law. No one and they sort of say that quickly, hoping that maybe mother won't say anything in his silence will to validate their claim but at times Mahler would sort of step in and say. Well, you know I love a beyond me to say. If I might, I dont subscribe necessarily two year. The way you analyze that I'm not saying it's the ballpark, I'm not supportive of that analytical charge. That's not a detour nation we made will make. With that in mind, you have told us that the Democrats, bigger oh they're kind of fantasy version of this hearing would be to draw from Robert Mahler the concession that, if Donald Trump president. He would be charged with a crime, and so will you

ascribing so far seems like them not quite directly, confronting that to the Democrats are sort of plodding along trying to get that Greece down by dead. One killer quote from Mahler to really put things over the top and then congressmen, TED Lou of California comes up. Thank you. Director mauler freer long history servers to our country and he goes directly for one of the chief questions about the report, which is if it were not for this Justice Department, rural dead says that a president cannot be indicted I would Mahler have indicted the present, and I like to ask you the reason again that you did not indict Donald Trump is because of oil. The opinion stating that you cannot dietary sitting President Correct

That is correct. The mother says yes, our big moment correct and the office here were all kind of looking at each other saying. Did he mean to see that he knew Oh, what a big deal it would be to say he did believe the present broke the law because it essentially say the Congress dad there was enough to charge him and if the Prosecutor is saying that then it certainly makes the notion of impeachment even greater in this.

Should sort of hangs out there really wild is. This could be pretty significant foot then. Now, before we go to questions, I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning when mother comes back one to begin the second half of questioning he clarifies what he had said. I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr Lu Lu said, and I quote, you didn't charge or president because of the o Elsie 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 present committed a crime while so he completely the fleets this entire thing, he basically takes a back. He puts the compassion any news that he was going to me

we will thereby between two or cancellations lost, creative gags and shrinking Arava knew the covered. Nineteen crisis is making it clear that the system supporting creative people is broken. Patriarch offers a better way. We help creators make up lost revenue and build a more sustainable income source by offering a monthly membership to their fans. In turn, fans get access to exclusive community premium contents and the chance to become active participants in the work. They love check out patriarch com now and help change the way art is valued. Some like, let's turn to the Republicans you told us that there are go, was to maintain the status quo, and why does exactly what that?

is to get mauler to reinforce the notion that there was no criminal conspiracy between the trunk campaign in Russia. So the sort of initially took a similar approach to nebular and ass Mahler, yes or no questions is that aid for your investigation did not establish that members. The drunk campaign conspired or coordinated with russian garment and relaxed interference, actively volume. One page, two volume, one page, one: seventy four it thank you. Yes, yes, thank you that affirmed the most important point to that. Isn't it true that we do not establish the present are those

Damn were involved in the charge, rushing computer, hacking, reactive measure conspiracies, or that the present otherwise and unlawful relationships with any russian officials volume to page. Seventy six correct leave the answer to the report so early years, but this quickly hesitate not two different issues which they picked out for a fair amount of time and it turned out to be something a bit surprising. Why don't? We have all of this investigation President trumped at the other side is talking about when you knew that you weren't going to prosecute in it was, I, where if you knew you were going to indict the president stage, you continue with your investigation and produce this massive doc. You

wait really embarrassing things about Trump and foisted on the public decision. You married no decision. You told us this morning and in your report that you made no determination so respectfully director, you didn't follow the special council regulations. It clearly says right a confidential report about decisions reached nowhere in here does it say: write a report about decisions that warrant reached. You wrote a hundred eighty pages, a hundred eighty pages about decisions that weren't reach about potential crimes that warrant charge or decided. That kind of reminds me of something that you and I discussed before, which is how former f b I Just call me handle the Hillary Clinton. Email server episode he decides not to indict comes out, gives a press conference in many people's minds, malines her and afterwards. The question is: are you not supposed to do that? If you decline to prosecute

correct. The Republicans are making a decent point about. How criminal investigations of our politicians are ended, how she We disclose facts about them and at the same time being a bit disingenuous, because when call me felt he Did they come out and lay out some of the evidence that they had collected in their investigation? The Republicans took them and ran with it, to undermine her as a presidential candidate. So now their outrage. There were looking at the fruits of a criminal investigation in which the central player, the president, has not been charged and are complaining about it in a similar fashion, to the way that Democrats complain about how combing out o the Clinton, the drafting and publication of some of the information in his report without an indictment without prosecution frankly flies in the face of american justice, and I find those facts this entire pro

says on American. It showed that the Republicans we're not going to stop at anything to attack mother there. They were to throw every single issue, they could come up with regard. Of whether it was in it actually onest one or not, and that's not maintaining the status quo. That is, although most undermining the special council and raising as many questions as possible about his investigation is correct it cut it, his motivations, in a way that other attacks on the Thus the did not it went directly, new mothers character and Susan's he had made during the investigation, and what was mothers response to us who is similar to

many responses he had during this, which was sort of like guinea, giving example other than Donald Trump, where the Justice Department determined that an investigative person was not exonerated because their innocence was not conclusively determine. I cannot, but this is a unique okay. Well, you can ok. I can agree with our character. Well, all right, you made your point and it seem like part of a larger strategy He was employed to sort of run out the clock. Let him say whatever they want ignore. Jeered and move on

ok. So what else did the Republicans focus on? Not surprisingly, they went back to their greatest hits on the investigation of prosecutor, which want to make sure there is no appearance of impropriety. In your case, you hired a bunch of people that did not like the president and raised questions about whether the investigators work, biased o me as you. When did you first learn of Peter Strokes, Animas toward Donald Trump Summer of seventeen, you didn't know before he was higher pay doing no. What Peter struck hated tromp. You didn't know that before he was made part of your team that what you did not know that all right job? When did you have to learn when I did find out, I acted swiftly to have him reassigned elsewhere,

he also House pick dad continuously. The media first began spreading this conspiracy theory in the spring of two thousand, and sixteen on fusion GPS, funded by the Deep Sea and the Hillary Clinton campaign, the United developing the steel dossier? Did you watch document of verified allegations about ties between tramp in Russia as well. But I can tell you is that the events at you are characterizing here now is part of it other matter that has been handled by the Department of Justice which had said: I'm not going to talk about correct I'm not going to discuss the issues regarding MR steal, it was this persistent efforts, effort throughout the entire.

Time even know at the top of the hearing. He said he would not discuss it. Did your office consider whether the russian government used steel sources to provide steel with this information? I can speak of her. I understand I'm asking these questions just for the record. So thanks for your patience MIKE, you started off by saying that success for the Republicans was maintaining the status quo, which may just be confirming the basic outlines of the Mulder Report, especially the fact that their a criminality. But I wonder if this republican strategy of focusing on all of up, issues that raised. Questions about the investigation is a different kind of success. For the Republicans, because it is kept, bringing them up and Robert mother didn't really offer much pushed back. Those party kindness seem to disconnect, I think so in some ways, because they knew they would have, or they certainly

add a person. They were questioning, who wasn't going to engage and fight and push back that hard, so it gave them the opportunity to share a creator, sound bites of them given to Mueller, while he was up there and to that end, I think that it was successful although they never really got mallard by my gone about mother and what use would represent success for hemp. Did he achieve what he wanted in these hearings towards the end of the day, director more eve, even ass, many times afternoon about collusion obstruction of justice and impeachment and the steel dossier? And I don't think your answers are going to change your fi. Ask you about those question swamp congressmen we'll heard of taxes with american Ass Mauler, I'm as a former CIA officer, the focus on something I think both sides of the political I can agree on

That is how do we prevent russian intelligence and other adversaries from doing this again, and you see sort of mother perk up and begin to really engage. On this issue in a way that he had on others in your investigation that you think that this was a single attempt by the Russians to get involved in our election. Or did you find evidence to suggest that trying to do this again, one single adapt their diet,

we sit here any sort. He gets a chance to ring the alarm bells, bowed interference, issues and they expect to do during the next campaign, and the Democrats mean into this was one and there are able to make something of it if we could put up slide six. This just came out Wikileaks. I love Wikileaks Donald Trump October tenth, twenty sixteenth, this Wikileaks stuff is unbelievable, is like a treasure trove down tromp October thirty. First, twenty sixteen

congressmen. Quigley from Chicago, brings up the fact that Donald Trump praised Wikileaks. When you, those courts, disturb you, Mr Director, I'm not sure now say do you asked well Piper problematic, as is an understatement in terms of whether to play this wave in terms of giving some no hope or some boost to what is ensured. Illegal activity. Congressmen wealth, ass, smaller if we established a new normal from this pass campaign that is going to apply to future campaigns so that, if any one of us running for the? U S house any candidate for the? U S, Any candidate for the presidency, the United States aware that of hostile foreign power is trying to influence and election as no duty to report

that to the FBI or other authorities. I hope I hope this is not the nor the new normal, but I fear and then chairman chef from your testimony today, I gather that you believe that knowingly accepting foreign assistance during the presidential campaign is an unethical thing to do at a crime and a crime circumstances and to the degree that it undermines our democracy and our institutions. We can agree that its also patriotic through and wrong through We should hold, are elected officials to a standard higher than mere avoidance of criminality shouldn't we absolutely so. Different mother than we ve seen throughout the hearing and is definitely stepping outside the four corners of the report? It feels like

in the last few exchanges, he's kind of offering clear, tough judgments about the conduct of the President non terms of necessarily crimes committed, but just in terms of basic right and wrong. The report is about an investigation that looks at whether laws are broken. It wasn't looking at questions of patriotism, but there is Mahler at the end of the day, answering a question about that about an ideal and a virtue that we have as a country not about whether a law. What. Broken, and maybe it took him until the end, to loosen up and get there, but by the end of the day you have the person, that's overseen. This investigation for the past

years, calling out this as bad behaviour and as a potential problem in that's not nuthin. Might you told us before these hearings that Democrats were determined to get color to bring this report to life and thereby eventually shift public opinion on the president's capability to counteract the narrative that the president and the attorney General Bill BAR have outlined. The trump did nothing wrong that this is a witch hunt is a waste of time. In the end, given everything you ve just laid out, Did the Democrats fulfil that mission? I don't think so. We'll have to see what the political fall out is and whether real, He pushes house members to embrace impeachment, but

we didn't walk out of that hearing today with any, a major new disclosure about the President's behavior- but I do want remind you something- you told us the day before the hearing, which is that a realistic form of democratic success, if they were not gonna, get Robert Mauler to say that the present committed a crime were in charge. If he were, president would be to just get him to affirm that the president's major talking points are false. Was there no obstruction No was there no collusion know. Did you exonerate the President now and the Democrats did get many different forms of bad, and so,

does that not meet your own threshold for success? Will I enters now and now I feel like I'm being questioned but seriously in certain looking back on that I dont think. In the trump era we ve seen major shifts in people's views of him when he's been shown to lie and mislead the publican. So I get that Where has more credibility than most and it does tat? The president had been misleading, but I'm not sure it's that powerful to actually change enough minds to drive this in a different direction, So is there a version of this where the democratic strategy

having not achieved the great moment that they needed to actually change public opinion have had this backfire. It may backfire in the sense that they went to these greatly, they put on this big, show and walk away with anything major and so the question. Again Why did you do it? Because this was your idea, We are here and not just. Why did you do it, but why are you continuing to investigate it? So if Molly came up here, get me new revelations. The Republicans can stand there and say what, Democrats. Why are you continuing to investigate the president on this matter? has done his thing. His report is out. You could move had with impeachment. If you want to, but politically you don't, so what are you doing right, either impeach or don't in each, and then let some talking about this? Let's not do like through a silent impeachment

where we're just trying to dredge up anything we can on the president and we really don't have the political will to go ahead and actually do it MIKE. Thank you. Pay for em director Mueller. Thank you again for being here today. This hearing is adjourned. The Democrats law, so that their parting is examples right now, after the hearings had ended. President Trump addressed reporters from the White House long seeing that mothers testimony had been addressed. Faster for Democrats and a vindication for him. What he showed more than anything else is that this whole thing has been three years of embarrassment and waste

for our country will be right back. What will returning to the workplace look like at we work? This question is top of mind. That's why we're adapting our space making sure that you and your team can continue working in a safe, healthy environment across our building. We're stepping up sanitation, maximizing fresh, clean air. Modifying seeding for distancing plus were adding friend safety reminders so that you can go about your day with more peace of mind, to learn about how we work is enhancing its spaces, go to weed. Co slash future here's what else you need to know

on Wednesday night. Governor of what are we go said he would resign after weeks of massive protests triggered by the release of text messages in which he mocked his own says the governor, Ricardo who sail had resisted stepping down, but was underlined by hundreds of thousands of protesters who paralysed the capitals. It is as they demanded his outstretched and a lengthy investigation. The federal trick has ordered Facebook to pay five billion dollar five and six. Two significant federal oversight violating its users, privacy, listen Turn signals a new chapter in the government attempts to regulate powerful technology companies, but the commission's five members appeared split about whether the settlement went far enough

the commission's two democratic members voted against the deal saying It would not sufficiently change how Facebook. That's it. I'm Michael BAR Cinema has as a surgeon and president of Howard University, Doktor Wayne Frederick, believes even our toughest. I can lead to strength and change. This is a difficult stormy do it, but it was strengthened in a way that no classroom activity could ever have. I'm only shipper host of the pack has made all the difference. I talked to achievers about how their managing the current moment and charging a course for the future find that made all the prince anywhere. You get your podcast created by Bank of America.