Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Debate Inside Trump Cabinet Over Striking Down ACA; Chicago Police Union Wants Federal Probe into Smollett Case; Senate Panel to Grill FAA Over Boeing 737 Max 8 Safety Issues. Aired 6-6:30a ET

Aired March 27, 2019 - 06:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The Republican Party will soon be known as the party of healthcare.

[05:59:11] SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY), MINORITY LEADER: The Trump position ties a two-year anchor around the neck of every Republican for the next two years.

SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R), MAINE: This is something I vehemently disagree with.

MAYOR RAHM EMANUEL, CHICAGO: This is without a doubt a whitewash of justice. It is wrong, full stop.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT, CLEARED OF CHARGES: I've been truthful and consistent on every single level since day one.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There was no political influence in this case.

Nobody has found him guilty.

EDDIE JOHNSON, CHICAGO POLICE SUPERINTENDENT: Do I think justice was served? No. This city is owed an apology.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. This is NEW DAY. It is Wednesday, March 27. It is 6 a.m. here in Washington, where I am on assignment, and John is in New York.

Nice to see you, John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Imagine not being in the same place.

CAMEROTA: It's very hard for me.

BERMAN: Yes, it's tough.

CAMEROTA: It's very difficult for me, but we're going to make it work.

BERMAN: All right.

CAMEROTA: And we have a lot of news. Because up first, CNN has learned that the Trump administration's push to strike down the Affordable Care Act has sparked a heated debate among the president's team.

Politico reports that Attorney General Bill Barr and Health Secretary Alex Azar are opposed to invalidating Obamacare without a viable alternative plan. The president, though, appears to be moving full steam ahead. He's trying to declare that the GOP will become the party of healthcare, and we'll see if his supporters need to see a plan to match that rhetoric, John.

BERMAN: Now, I want to make clear, this isn't just politics. For 53 million people with pre-existing conditions, millions more with healthcare because of the Medicaid expansion, this is a matter of life and livelihood. But, yes, there are politics at play.

And if you hear an unexpected loud noise, it might very well be Democrats shrieking with delight. The congressional leadership was already looking to turn the focus from the summary of the Mueller report to pocketbook issues. We saw it right on our air, right here on NEW DAY, an almost literal human pivot from the House Democratic whip.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JAMES CLYBURN (D-SC), MAJORITY WHIP: A Mueller report has been done. That's a chapter that's closed. And I think that last night, this administration opened a new chapter when it moved to completely invalidate the Affordable Care Act. And that, to me, is the No. 1 thing on people's minds.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Now, it should be noted that there still are plenty of people reading that Russia chapter. The chair of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, tells "The Washington Post" that undoubtedly, there is collusion, even though the special counsel said there is not enough evidence to establish a criminal case.

And we heard overnight from fierce Trump critic George Conway, who, yes, is the husband of the president's counselor, Kellyanne Conway. He flat-out declared the president guilty. Guilty of being unfit for office.

Let's begin our coverage. CNN's Joe Johns live at the White House with this healthcare debate, which seems to be an internal debate inside the Trump administration.

JOE JOHNS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's for sure, John. And this was a surprise move by the Justice Department, giving House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and congressional Democrats just the opening they needed to shift the national conversation away from the Mueller report and back onto their No. 1 issue that hits millions of Americans right in the pocketbook. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: The GOP will never stop trying to destroy the affordable healthcare of America's families.

JOHNS: Democrats seizing on the Trump administration's effort to strike down the entire Affordable Care Act seeking to put healthcare at the center of political debate heading into the 2020 campaign.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY), MINORITY LEADER: Trump position ties a two-year anchor around the neck of every Republican for the next two years.

JOHNS: The Justice Department deciding Monday that the entire law should be invalidated, including provisions protecting at least 52 million Americans with preexisting conditions. President Trump throwing his support behind the decision.

TRUMP: The Republican Party will soon be known as the party of healthcare. You watch.

JOHNS: But inside the White House, an official tells CNN that DOJ's decision was a source of heated debate. Politico reports that several cabinet members, including Attorney General William Barr and Health Secretary Alex Azar argued against trying to strike down Obamacare, because Republicans do not have a viable replacement plan. Moderate Senator Susan Collins, who voted against the 2017 repeal effort, telling reporters she was surprised and disappointed by DOJ's decision.

COLLINS: This is something I vehemently disagree with, and I hope that the courts do not go along with what the Justice Department has requested.

JOHNS: Other Republicans downplaying concerns about the impact that repealing Obamacare could have on millions of Americans.

REP. SEAN DUFFY (R), WISCONSIN: Oftentimes unless the Congress is forced to act, it doesn't act. We'll put out a plan that we think will actually drive down the cost of care for the people that we represent.

JOHNS: A recent CNN poll shows that healthcare was a key issue for Democrats ahead of the 2018 midterm election when President Trump promised to protect sick Americans.

TRUMP: We will also protect Americans with preexisting conditions. We're going to take care of them.

JOHNS: Democrats now pledging to hold the president to his word.

CLYBURN: We're going to remind the American people time and time again of that broken promise.

(END VIDEOTAPE) JOHNS: House Speaker Pelosi also unveiled the Democrats' own plan, which she said would reduce premium costs and strengthen protections for preexisting conditions. She said she will adopt a wait and see attitude on the release of the Mueller report, which CNN has been told could come out in weeks, not months.

Back to you.

[06:05:02] CAMEROTA: OK, Joe. Thank you very much.

Joining me now is CNN political analyst Rachael Bade. She's a congressional reporter for "The Washington Post."

Rachael, great to see you in person here.

RACHAEL BADE, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Great to be here.

CAMEROTA: OK. So post-Barr report, as we wait for the Mueller report, it seems both parties are turning to healthcare. So let's talk about the Democrats' play right now. They think it was a winning issue for them in 2018. It appears to have been.

So are all the disparate people in the caucus, all the Democrats on board with this new plan?

BADE: Absolutely. Trump gave Nancy Pelosi a gift. I mean, Democrats have had a really tough couple of weeks. There's been a lot of infighting we've seen between Ilhan Omar and her comments about Israel. AIPAC was this weekend. This was an issue that has sort of split open a divide in the Democratic Party.

And then they got the news that Mueller, you know, didn't find evidence to charge the president with either obstruction or some sort of conspiracy with Russia.

And so, you know, the news the next morning, Tuesday morning that the White House and the Trump administration is going to try to completely axe Obamacare, well, perhaps not surprising. The timing was perfect for the Democrats, because this is one issue where they can unify. This is something that they won their majority on in 2018. They flipped 40 seats.

And Republicans, while some of them might be publicly saying they support this, a lot of them privately are very concerned. And in fact, Kevin McCarthy, who's a minority leader in the House, a very close ally of President Trump's, he was asked about this yesterday morning, and he typically answers questions pretty readily. He said, "I'm not going to comment. Reach out to my White -- my office." And that in and of itself told you this is a problem.

CAMEROTA: So why do you think the DOJ did that now?

BADE: Totally perplexing. Perhaps, you know, communications wires got crossed. It doesn't make sense. You know, the White House was doing a victory lap -- a victory lap, multiple victory laps after the Mueller report and that was something you would have thought they wanted to continue that story line.

CAMEROTA: They could have stretched that one out.

BADE: They could have stretched it out a long time.

CAMEROTA: But you know, I mean, I think that the president operates under if he says it, it is real. You know, if he says it, people will believe. And so he's trying to have the Republicans grab the mantel of healthcare. And sometimes, he does have something up his sleeve. Is there a plan now?

BADE: But the problem is, Republicans have tried this before. Just in the weeks before the election, we saw a number of Republicans in tough positions say, "I voted to protect preexisting conditions," when in fact they had voted for the Obamacare repeal effort, and that included getting rid of those protections for people who have these.

CAMEROTA: And do voters fall for that?

BADE: They didn't in the midterm elections. So perhaps Trump thinks that he has some, you know, sort of magic that, if he says it -- and clearly, he says, "I'm going to say I'm going to protect preexisting conditions" but also wants to get rid of Obamacare -- that people will listen. And sure, a lot of people in the base do listen to him.

But this has been tested in the suburbs, and it totally blew back on the party. It's perplexing why they think this is a good idea right now, leading into 2020.

CAMEROTA: Fascinating. Rachael Bade, thank you --

BADE: Yes.

CAMEROTA: -- very much -- John.

BERMAN: Thanks, Alisyn.

More major news overnight. The police union in Chicago is calling for a federal investigation after prosecutors dropped all charges against actor Jussie Smollett. It comes just weeks after Smollett was indicted on 16 felony counts for allegedly staging an attack on himself.

CNN's Ryan Young is live in Chicago.

Ryan, I think there we all thought we couldn't humanly see any more twists in this case, and now this.

RYAN YOUNG, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes. So many twists and turns, John. If you think about it, we still may never know all the details to it, because so far, this court case has been sealed.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

YOUNG (voice-over): The Chicago police union calling for a federal investigation into the handling of "Empire" actor Jussie Smollett's case after prosecutors abruptly dropped all 16 felony charges against Smollett for allegedly staging a hate crime against himself and filing a false police report.

KEVIN GRAHAM, PRESIDENT, CHICAGO FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE: We want to make sure that the Justice Department takes a very hard look at what went on with that case and also what has occurred today.

YOUNG: The union zeroing in on the state's attorney, Kim Fox, who recused herself from the case in February. Text messages obtained by CNN show Smollett's family friend and former chief of staff for Michelle Obama, Tina Chin, reached out to Fox about concerns about the investigation. Smollett's attorney denying that the actor's fame played any role in the dismissal.

PATRICIA BROWN HOLMES, ATTORNEY FOR JUSSIE SMOLLETT: There was no political influence in this case.

YOUNG: Smollett maintains his innocence.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT, ACTOR: I've been truthful and consistent on every single level since day one. I would not be my mother's son if I was capable of one drop of what I had been accused of.

YOUNG: But the stunning decision to essentially let him off the hook drawing immediate backlash from Chicago's mayor and police department.

RAHM EMANUEL, MAYOR OF CHICAGO: This is a whitewash of justice. A grand jury could not have been clearer.

EDDIE JOHNSON, SUPERINTENDENT, CHICAGO POLICE: Do I think justice was served? No. What do I think justice is? I think this city is still owed an apology.

[06:10:06] YOUNG: Prosecutors have not given a detailed explanation for why they abandoned the case, saying in a statement the decision was made "after reviewing all the facts and circumstances of the case," including Smollett's community service and agreement to forfeit his $10,000 bond to the city of Chicago.

Lead prosecutor Joseph Magats later said that Smollett had no previous criminal record.

JOSEPH MAGATS, PROSECUTOR: Our priority is violent crimes and the drivers of violence. Jussie Smollett is neither one of those.

YOUNG: But Magats also stressing that dropping the charges did not exonerate the actor.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you think did what he was charged with doing?

MAGATS: Yes. We stand behind the decision to charge Mr. Smollett and to indict him.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

YOUNG: John, the big question now, will one more shoe drop? Because the Osundairo brothers, who have never talked before, have those text messages between Jussie Smollett and themselves. Will they ever talk? Will they ever give an interview to give some of the details about this case that the public has never seen? We'll have to wait and see.

BERMAN: Yes. I think at this point, zero people are going to be willing to predict what happens next in this case, given where we've gone so far. Ryan Young for us in Chicago.

Joining me now is Joey Jackson, a criminal defense attorney and CNN legal analyst.

And Joey, I'm not sure this is a legal term, but the social and societal response to what happened yesterday seems to be WTF?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Absolutely, and that's the appropriate response.

Look, let's be frank, and let's call this what it is. He did it, and the prosecution decided that this was the appropriate disposition.

Now, the confusing elements of this is just come out and say that. Say that, "Listen, we believe that we went too hard on him. A 16- count indictment was not appropriate, given what occurred here and under the circumstances. We don't think he should swallow a felony. He's a young African-American man who's done tremendous things for the community, who we believe has a future, and a felony would really decimate him. As a result of that, in the interest of justice, we're moving forward." They did not do that.

And he comes out and says, "I'm innocent. I'd never -- this would never happen," and that's just not appropriate.

Is this the proper resolution? Perhaps it is. But to suggest and to otherwise hoodwink the American people, not to alert your superintendent when they've diverted all types of resources, you know, no wonder why Rahm Emanuel, the mayor, in addition to the superintendent, were none too pleased.

BERMAN: Let's break that into parts, because you said a lot of fascinating stuff there. No. 1, alternative prosecution or alternative disposition?

JACKSON: Yes.

BERMAN: Prosecutors can find a different way out than taking cases to court. And in this jurisdiction, in Illinois, apparently, 5,700 cases in the last two years have been solved this way. So there are examples of things like this sort of happening.

JACKSON: Of course. That's right. So what happens is, but they generally happen prior to indictment. When you have a case, and you're handling it, and the facts are so compelling, you might go to the prosecutor and say, "Look, there's an alternate way to resolve this. We do not have to go down the path of 16 felonies, and as a result of that, let's talk about community service. Let's talk about the forfeiture of bail. Let's talk about my client's prior commitment to the community and all that he or she have done." Then you do it.

You don't go guns a-blazing, you have a 16-count indictment, indict him for everything, every theory under humanity in terms of lying about a hate crime to a police officer, then reiterating it to a detective and then say, "Oops, never mind." And by the way, the mayor finds out and the superintendent when all of us do. Just not the way resolutions are done.

BERMAN: And those are the other two things that are so strange here, No. 1, blindsiding the police as they did.

And, No. 2, Jussie Smollett's continued proclamation of innocence here, which is, in many ways, embarrassing, I think, for the prosecutors.

JACKSON: So let's dissect that. In terms of the police being blindsided, it's -- it is not unusual, John, for there to be disagreements between how the police believe a case should be resolved or disposed of and a prosecutor. There are disagreements all the time. And those disagreements, you know what? Sometimes they're handled. Sometimes they're not, but they're discussed.

But not to have even any line of communication, that is like, wow. Right? And so thereafter, now you get to the point where you sit down with the defendant and you say, "Look, this is what we're going to do, because it's appropriate, because you do have the rest of your life to live and we value as a prosecution and as a society, right, contrition. We value -- you have the ability to be rehabilitated. We're going to let this go."

But then you don't come out, knowing that the prosecution says, "You did it, but we're going to resolve it this way," and say, "Hey, I'm innocent. I'd never put anyone through the fire like that." That's just hogwash. We know it happened. They just decided to resolve it in this way.

BERMAN: All right. Joey Jackson, obviously, so much more to discuss with this and so much more to understand. And I don't still think we know everything that's going on here. Joey Jackson, appreciate it -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Joey's explanation was super helpful, and I'm still just as confused.

BERMAN: Right.

CAMEROTA: So we will be talking about this in the rest of the program.

Meanwhile, it's a critical day on Capitol Hill for Boeing. Transportation officials set for a grilling from senators about the safety of the 737 Max 8 fleet.

[06:15:02] But less than 24 hours ago, there was another emergency involving one of the jets, this time here in the U.S.

Jessica Schneider is live for us here with more.

What happened, Jessica?

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, it is a big day of scrutiny for Boeing, Alisyn. The Senate subcommittee on aviation will hear from the acting FAA administrator, along with officials from the Department of Transportation and the NTSB.

And the remarks of the opening statements that we've obtained, the acting FAA administrator is expected to acknowledge that the agency's oversight approach really needs to evolve after those two fatal crashes involving the Boeing 737 Max; and he's expected to also defend that certification process, which has been heavily scrutinized for that so-called self-certification that Boeing is allowed to conduct.

And of course, lawmakers are expected to press the FAA on why it waited so many days to ground the 737 Max planes in the U.S. The FAA, though, expected to defend that decision, since the agency says it wasn't seeing any systemic performance issues.

Now, at about the same time, this Senate hearing this afternoon, Boeing is inviting 200 pilots and industry stakeholders to their facility just outside of Seattle, where they assemble those airliners. And it's all in this effort to begin restoring industry confidence in its product.

So this session will center on the 737 Max itself, as well as Boeing's planned software update, which the company, we now know, plans to submit to the FAA by the end of the week. This is a software update that could resolve those issues that aviation authorities believe led to the crash of that Lion Air flight back in October.

So as for this Senate hearing, Boeing will not be answering questions today on Capitol Hill, but the intention from this subcommittee is to have Boeing reps testify at some point soon.

And of course, all of this happening amid this backdrop of this emergency landing of that Southwest Airlines flight. It was a Boeing 737 Max. It happened in Orlando last night.

Now this flight was actually being ferried to California for storage while these planes continue to be grounded. And we know that the flight had no passengers. But, John, the pilots actually reported an issue with one of the engines after takeoff. No doubt that will be scrutinized, as well, amid all of this scrutiny for Boeing -- John.

BERMAN: Yes. And every little thing that happens with a Max 8 from now on will be scrutinized. Jessica Schneider, thank you very much for that.

Big political news overnight. Joe Biden trying to address one of the most controversial chapters in his past: how he handled the Clarence Thomas hearings and the testimony from Anita Hill. But some of his new language has invited some new controversy.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:21:28] BERMAN: New this morning, former Vice President Joe Biden is expressing regret over how he handled the Clarence Thomas hearing where Anita Hill testified back in 1991. This comes as the speculation grows about his potential run for president in 2020.

But the language he is now using is especially careful and notably unsatisfying to some Democrats.

CNN's Arlette Saenz joins joins us now here in New York to explain -- Arlette.

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Hey, John. This is one of the areas of Joe Biden's long career that is going to face fresh scrutiny, should he enter the presidential race, particularly in the wake of the #MeToo movement.

Now, Joe Biden was chair of the Senate judiciary hearing back when Anita Hill testified alleging that Clarence Thomas, then the Supreme Court nominee, had sexually harassed her. And last night, Joe Biden took this directly on, saying that Hill had to testify in front of a bunch of white guys who didn't fully comprehend the issue of sexual harassment and how to deal with that. Take a listen to what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT: We knew a lot less about the extent harassment back then, over 30 years ago. But she paid a terrible price. She was abused through the hearing. She was taken advantage of. Her reputation was attacked. I wish I could have done something.

When Anita Hill, when Anita Hill came to testify, she faced a committee that didn't fully understand what the hell it was all about. To this day, I regret I couldn't come up with a way to get her the kind of hearing she deserved.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SAENZ: Now, Biden did face criticism after those comments, particularly on social media from people saying that he actually could have done more, because he was the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time.

Now, in addition to those comments about Anita Hill, Biden also talked about violence against women, saying that Americans need to change the culture, saying that that has been a white man's culture dating back centuries.

One big question is whether Biden and Anita Hill have spoken directly about that hearing nearly 30 years ago. Right now, that's unclear -- John.

BERMAN: Isn't it stunning we don't have the answer to that simple question, whether or not they have spoken with that. Arlette Saenz, great reporting. Great to have you here. Thank you very much. This is just one of the major headlines we have to discuss. Joining us now, John Avlon, CNN senior political analyst; Toluse Olorunnipa, White House reporter for "The Washington Post"; and Rachael Bade, a "Washington Post" congressional reporter and a CNN political analyst.

John Avlon, the words from the former vice president, this was clearly a planned event. He went there, you know, with the intention of trying to clear some of this up, but he says, "I wish I could have done something. To this day I regret I couldn't come up with a way get to kind of hearing she deserved."

Not "I didn't," but "I couldn't." Well, he was the chairman of the committee. I'm an expert in contrition, having to apologize for a great many things. It's not that he couldn't. It's that he didn't, and he didn't choose that language last night.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: That's right. And look, I think he's still -- this is unfinished business. This is something that still is -- obviously hangs over the head of his career but, more importantly, a potential presidential campaign. He's unwilling to say he didn't, because he's in the Senate parliamentarian way. You know, there were lots of other senators, and they didn't have the cultural understanding, which is painfully true, in retrospect.

But what it comes across a little bit as is I had no idea I would be running for president 20 years later. And so he's getting to this awfully late.

CAMEROTA: So Rachael, I find this to be such a fascinating cultural moment, and Joe Biden is right in the middle of it.

[06:25;04] Are we going to hold all of our candidates this year responsible for what happened 28 years ago? I mean, this -- the way he treated her during the hearing, as well as all -- the way all of the senators did, has not aged well. In the rearview mirror, it doesn't look well.

But it was 28 years ago, and so much has changed in just the past two years. How are we supposed to process this?

BADE: Right. And I think that that's how -- how he talks about this, and that's why it matters so much. You know, he started to talk there about, you know, back decades ago, we didn't fully understand what sexual harassment is.

And if he sort of keeps with that kind of talking point, the sort of contrition, this feeling that "I didn't understand" and "I am sorry," then he can very well find a way to sort of navigate this path going forward.

But this is the beginning for him. I mean, he hasn't even entered the 2020 field yet. He's going to have to answer for this over and over again.

And politicians, especially long-term politicians have a problem sometimes where, once they apologize, they think they can just move on. So they start to get defensive. And perhaps that what you're starting to see with him, saying, "Oh, I wish I could have done something." No, you should have done something.

He's going to have to remain apologetic through this entire campaign. Otherwise, he's going to have a problem, I think.

TOLUSE OLORUNNIPA, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: And running against someone, if he gets the nomination, who doesn't ever apologize. But President Trump is known as someone who does not apologize; and he uses that as a piece of strength to show that, you know, "I don't have to apologize. I can be strong in what I've said in the past. I can stand by my past actions."

CAMEROTA: And he certainly has his own bag of issues with sexual harassment, et cetera, et cetera, and so that is a different tact, you're right, that he takes.

BERMAN: His issue here isn't Donald Trump, though, in the immediate sense. His issue is the 76 other Democrats standing on stage with him at the debates, many of whom have made the #MeToo movement part of their campaign and all of whom are significantly younger. And part of a different generation that I think does understand the language of this -- John.

AVLON: Look, there's no question the rest of the -- the rest of the field is of a totally generation. We've never seen a generational spread like this in a field. And it's something he's going to have to deal with.

That said, one of the things Donald Trump's done with apologizing is he's made it look weak. And it may play well with the Democratic base, but there's a sense that the Democrats are going to go around apologizing constantly for everything, not only their own actions but their place in history and all manner of historic sins and that Trump will use that as a bludgeon, because he's taken that off the table for him and made an unwillingness to apologize appear as a source of strength to his base.

CAMEROTA: All right, John, let's move on to waiting for the Mueller report. We thought we were done with waiting for the Mueller report, but we're not, because we haven't seen the Mueller report; but we have the Barr report.

Well, George Conway, conservative attorney, who's also the husband of Kellyanne Conway, the president's top counselor, has some thoughts about what might be in it. Here's what George Conway says: "If his report doesn't exonerate the president, there must be something pretty damning in it about him, even if it might not suffice to prove a crime beyond a reasonable doubt."

One more thing from George Conway: "Reading that statement together with the no-exoneration statement, it's hard to escape the conclusion that Mueller wrote his report to allow the American people and Congress to decide what to make of the facts. And what -- that is what should -- must -- happen now."

Toluse, you know, he's just wondering what's in it the way the rest of us are.

OLORUNNIPA: Yes, it's fascinating that you've seen this celebratory response from the Trump camp, saying this is a complete and total exoneration when you actually look at the language in the report that was quoted by Attorney General Barr.

It basically says that President Trump is not exonerated of a crime of obstruction of justice. It said that, you know, there was a difficult issue. There's, you know, support for both sides, and the attorney general weighed in.

And you hear from George Conway that, actually, he believes that Congress should be the one to weigh in and to decide whether or not this is an impeachable offense, this is something whether or not Congress should weigh in, because President Trump could, potentially, be guilty of obstruction of justice. And he's writing in this op-ed piece in "The Post" that we should not expect the bar for the president to be that he's not guilty of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. There should be a much higher bar for presidents.

And that's an argument that a lot of Americans are willing to accept because we normally do not expect our presidents to just be not guilty of crimes. They also have to be sort of moral leaders and also above reproach when it comes to crimes such as obstruction of justice.

BERMAN: Unless you think -- unless you think that it's only, you know, fierce Trump critic George Conway, who has picked up on the language from Mueller, that he does not exonerate the president here, Rudy Giuliani called it a cheap shot.

So both sides of this debate are looking at that language, and they know it's important, Rachael. I think we know that there is significance in that language. We just don't know what the significance is just yet.

BADE: Yes, that's exactly right. I mean, the Democratic Party sort of being up on the Hill the past 48 hours, it's interesting to see the sort of split. You have people like Adam Schiff who is the Democratic chairman of the Intelligence Committee.