Return to Transcripts main page
New Day
Israeli Election Too Close to Call; Barr to Release Redacted Version of Mueller Report Within a Week; Treasury Expected to Miss Deadline to Hand Over Trump's Taxes. Aired 6-6:30a ET
Aired April 10, 2019 - 06:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: As it stands, this race is too close to call.
[05:59:16] UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He has a pretty clear path. The center left is looking bleak.
WILLIAM BARR, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: I don't intend to send the full, unredacted report to the committee.
REP. JERRY NADLER (D-NY): If we don't get everything, we will issue the subpoena and go to court.
REP. MAXINE WATERS (D-CA): I have the gavel at this point. If you wish to leave, you may.
STEVE MNUCHIN, U.S. TREASURY SECRETARY: Can you clarify that for me?
WATERS: Yes, clarify --
MNUCHIN: So -- so I'm dismissed?
WATERS: If you wish to leave, you may.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
Announcer: This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.
JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All that and there's a "Grease" prequel.
ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: I know we have a lot of news to get to, but I'd grab the Rizzo mantle --
BERMAN: Yes.
CAMEROTA: -- and run with it. I'm excited about it.
BERMAN: I don't want to be Kenickie.
CAMEROTA: Why not? Kenickie was great.
BERMAN: He's the worst character in the movie.
CAMEROTA: I liked Kenickie.
BERMAN: Sid Caesar is a better character in the movie than Kenickie.
CAMEROTA: You can be Sid Caesar.
BERMAN: Yes. I don't want to be Sid Caesar either. I don't want to be either of them. I want to be Danny.
CAMEROTA: All right. We -- obviously, there's a debate. Welcome to our viewers in the United States and around the world. This is NEW DAY. It is Wednesday, April 10, 6 a.m. here in New York. We do begin with breaking news for you.
Israel's election is too close to call at this moment. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his chief rival, Benny Gantz, are both claiming victory. But at this hour, Gantz is acknowledging that the odds do not seem to be in his favor.
If Netanyahu pulls off a win, he will make history, becoming the country's longest serving prime minister. In just moments, we will take you live to Jerusalem for this nail-biter of an election.
Also new this morning, back here in the U.S., Attorney General William Barr heads back to Capitol Hill to testify, this time before a Senate panel, and perhaps answer more questions -- or not.
BERMAN: Right. Because there are huge unanswered questions after his first day of testimony. Most of all, has he been speaking to the White House about the contents of the Mueller report?
The attorney general opened the door wide open to the possibility that the president and his lawyers already know more about the information inside the report, damning or otherwise, than Congress and the public. Lawmakers will have a redacted version of the Mueller report within days, but Congress wants more, promising to issue a subpoena for the full version, no blackouts at all.
Meanwhile, today is the deadline for the IRS to give Congress the president's tax returns. They will almost definitely ignore that deadline. The treasury secretary sparred with Democrats over the release and revealed that treasury lawyers have been coordinating with the White House on this matter.
So the hearing with the treasury secretary was also notable for a remarkably tense argument between the secretary and the chair about the hearing's length. We'll get to that.
We're going to begin with the big international headline. CNN's Oren Liebermann live in Jerusalem with the breaking news, where things appear to be looking up for the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, Oren.
OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: At this point, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seems all but assured of victory. And that's because it looks like he has the far clearer path to forming a governing coalition, putting together a government. Though the head to head with him and his rival, former chief of staff
Benny Gantz, remains very close, within a few thousand votes, within a percentage, the all-important question of who is it that can put together a government, that seems all but assured to be Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as more and more results come in.
At this point, we've looked at more than 97 percent of votes counted, according to the Central Elections Committee, and there it looks like, in the all-important question of who can get to a 61-seat coalition, it is Netanyahu that can get to 65 seats, with a right-wing governing coalition. His rival, Gantz, only at 55 seats.
Crucially, not all of the votes are in at this point. There are a couple of hundred thousand votes -- soldiers' votes, diplomats' votes -- that are counted over the next couple of days, and those could swing this potentially even more in Netanyahu's favor.
And that leads to one of the other questions. Because hanging over Netanyahu's head this whole time has been corruption investigations. If those break even more towards Netanyahu, it seems Netanyahu may have a government that may protect him, even if he is indicted in a few months' time with those corruption investigations looming above his head.
John, at this point, it seems Netanyahu has a clear path to victory, but the results at this point are not yet final. Perhaps they will be throughout the day.
BERMAN: Oren, throughout this election, it seemed as if there was another figure, a third figure who, in a way, was on the ballot. And that was President Donald Trump of the United States. He, directly and indirectly, played a huge role in this campaign, correct?
LIEBERMANN: President Donald Trump was, you're right, a huge role in the election. And Netanyahu was more than happy to play up that relationship between Netanyahu and Trump.
Trump appearing to openly campaign for Netanyahu, giving him major political gifts over the course of the last two weeks. Those include, first of all, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visiting the Western Wall in the old city of Jerusalem with Netanyahu, which was unprecedented.
Beyond that, U.S. recognition of Israeli sovereignty in the Golan Heights. In addition to that, designating Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terror organization, which Netanyahu seemed to take some credit for.
All of that made it clear, in the eyes of the Israeli public, that Trump preferred Netanyahu. Do we know exactly how many votes it affected? No. But it certainly didn't help [SIC] Netanyahu, as he seems to have secured a fifth term in office and will become, this summer, the longest serving prime minister in Israel's history.
CAMEROTA: OK. Oren Liebermann, bring us the breaking developments as you get them. Thank you very much. So in a few hours, Attorney General William Barr heads back to Capitol
Hill to answer questions, this time from senators. Yesterday, Barr testified before a House panel that he plans to release a redacted version of the Mueller report within a week.
CNN's Sunlen Serfaty is live in Washington for us with more.
Hi, Sunlen.
SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Alisyn.
Yes, this is round two for the attorney general. He will appear in just a few hours, Senate side this time. And while today's hearing, again, is supposed to be about the DOJ's budget, it will be dominated by questions about the Mueller report, as Washington braces for the redacted version to be released in the next week.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
[06:05:07] SERFATY (voice-over): Attorney General William Barr says the wait is almost over.
BARR: Within a week, I will be in a position to release the report to the public.
SERFATY: But not the version of Robert Mueller's report Democrats want.
BARR: I don't intend this -- at this stage to send the full, unredacted report to the committee.
SERFATY: Instead, Barr says, with help from Mueller's team, he'll provide a redacted version using color-coded explanations to extract grand jury material, classified information and other private details. House Democrats say that's not good enough.
REP. ED CASE (D-HI): This is what drives the public crazy when they see something like this. This is what we have to try to avoid.
SERFATY: House Dems have already authorized a subpoena to get the full report.
NADLER: If we don't get everything, we will issue the subpoena and go to court.
SERFATY: Barr defended his four-page summary on Mueller's nearly 400- page report, saying Mueller could not establish conspiracy between Trump's campaign and Russia, or make a final determination about obstruction of justice.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No collusion. There's no obstruction. It's over; it's done. It's over.
BARR: Well, the letter speaks for itself.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I thought it did, too.
SERFATY: Barr's letter, released only two days after Mueller submitted his findings on the nearly two-year-long investigation. The A.G. revealed the White House was notified before his memo went to Capitol Hill last month, but he refused to say if the White House has already seen the report.
REP. NITA LOWEY (D-NY): Did the White House see the report before you released your summarizing letter? Has the White House seen it since then?
BARR: I've said what I'm going to say about the report today.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SERFATY: And Barr had originally set his timetable to release the redacted report in mid-April. And he confirmed that he is, indeed, on track to meet that, again, meaning that this redacted version is coming at some point in the next week, Alisyn. But of course, Democrats want much more than that.
CAMEROTA: Indeed, they do. Sunlen, thank you very much for setting all of that up for us.
Joining us now to talk about it is CNN senior political analyst John Avlon.
Let's start where Sunlen left off.
JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes.
CAMEROTA: That was Nita Lowey asking him, "Have you briefed the White House about this?"
And he just -- he said, "I have said what I'm going to say about the report today. I'm not going to say anything more until the report is out."
So why wouldn't he answer that? Is there something wrong with briefing the White House?
AVLON: It was interesting, because he was forthcoming in some areas, but he decidedly punted and did not answer that. The open question seems to be, because they said they did not share the report with the White House before the letter was sent, is whether they've done so after the fact. One of many open questions that senators today on the appropriations subcommittee will have the chance to ask Barr.
CAMEROTA: I don't think he's going to answer it today.
AVLON: What gives you that impression, Alisyn?
CAMEROTA: He didn't seem to want to answer it.
AVLON: No. CAMEROTA: And that just -- I think it begs the question of did he do
something wrong by briefing the White House? Should he not be briefing the White House? I mean, obviously, I get that Congress wouldn't like it, but is it illegal to brief the White House? Why wouldn't he be forthcoming about it?
AVLON: That is a question only Bill Barr can answer. There's no indication that that would be illegal or even improper.
But a lot of the questions surrounding his relationship with the special counsel, the the decision, for example, to say that we will not pursue obstruction cases, when that was apparently not concluded by -- by Mueller, there are a lot of questions about the special counsel reporting up to the A.G., who's a partisan appointee. And that's where the scrutiny is going to come, and that's where it should come.
One of the open questions is just did Mueller intend for you to make that decision, that massive decision? Or had he intended that to be a decision that Congress could make?
CAMEROTA: That's the heart of the matter.
AVLON: Yes.
CAMEROTA: Why don't we know the answer to that? Did he -- did he address that yesterday?
AVLON: He did not address that yesterday. And I think you can expect some senators on the appropriations subcommittee to follow up on that today.
Barr's answers today, I think, will be, even more so than yesterday, "I've got the redacted version of the report coming out in a week's time or less. Wait for it. And then we'll do this all over again."
The open question, of course, is what are the redactions? Democrats are opposing any of them, in effect. I think it's reasonable for the A.G. to redact some things if it might compromise an ongoing investigation, or sources and methods. But that's one of the many points of conflict here you're going to see.
CAMEROTA: Here are some of the things that we learned. I don't even know if these count as that newsworthy, because I think we already knew these.
No. 1, it would be within a week from now. That's important (ph), to have a date certain.
AVLON: Ballpark.
CAMEROTA: Within a week, yes. Better than ballpark.
He's not going to hand it over unredacted. As you say, that's what lawmakers wanted. He said he's not going to do that.
AVLON: Yes.
CAMEROTA: It will be color-coded. That's new.
AVLON: Yes. Put it in a Trapper Keeper.
CAMEROTA: And -- and Robert Mueller's team is involved. That was a question.
AVLON: Yes.
CAMEROTA: And I think that that may give Democrats some comfort, to know that investigators are involved in helping draft this.
AVLON: Yes. And that's interesting.
What also came out, notably, yesterday is that Mueller declined to participate in looking at the letter Barr wrote. That's a degree of separation that may be significant. We'll find out in the coming days.
CAMEROTA: All right. John Avlon, thank you very much for all that -- John.
BERMAN: All right. Today is the deadline set by House Democrats for the IRS to hand over six years of President Trump's tax returns. No one expects them to meet that deadline.
The treasury secretary, Steve Mnuchin, clashed with Democrats at a hearing on Tuesday while admitting that his department has consulted with the White House over the request.
Our Lauren Fox is live on Capitol Hill with the latest here. This was quite a hearing, Lauren.
LAUREN FOX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, that's right, John. And it was a stunning admission from the treasury secretary yesterday, and he got into quite a heated exchange with the top Democrat on the Financial Services Committee.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
FOX (voice-over): It's deadline day, but don't expect to see President Trump's tax returns. House Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal requested six years' of records from the IRS by today. Democrats anticipating a protracted stalemate, as they wait for the agency to hand over the president's tax returns.
WATERS: I think that's a fight that the public wants us to fight.
He said he would give those tax returns. Every other president has released those tax returns.
FOX: Neal says he plans to send a follow-up request this week. The battle is likely to end up in court.
The House Financial Services Committee grilled Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin Tuesday, where he acknowledged treasury lawyers spoke with the White House about a potential request for the returns.
MNUCHIN: Our legal department has consulted with the White House, as they would and as I believe would be normal. That is not taking direction from the White House. I don't view that as interference.
FOX: That did not satisfy Democrats.
REP. CAROLYN MALONEY (D-NY): The fact that there was any communication with the White House about this is deeply troubling.
FOX: The hearing reaching a boiling point in its closing moments, chairman Maxine Waters and Mnuchin clashing over whether it was time to adjourn.
WATERS: Is it possible you could give us another 15 minutes to get to these matters?
MNUCHIN: I have a foreign leader waiting in my office at 5:30, OK? I've agreed to stay longer. It will be embarrassing if I keep this person waiting.
I have here every single time Jack Lew and other people came here. There's never been anybody that's been here more than three hours and 15 minutes. I've sat here for over three hours and 15 minutes. I've told you I'll come back.
WATERS: I appreciate that, and I appreciate your reminding us of the length of time other secretaries have been here. This is a new way, and it's a new day and it's a new chair.
MNUCHIN: Well, the -- OK, well --
WATERS: And I have the gavel at this point. If you wish to leave, you may.
MNUCHIN: Can you clarify that for me?
WATERS: Yes, clarify.
MNUCHIN: So I'm -- I'm dismissed.
WATERS: If you wish to leave, you may.
MNUCHIN: Well, then please --
WATERS: You may go any time you want.
MNUCHIN: Please dismiss everybody. I believe you're supposed to take the gravel [SIC] and bang it. That's the appropriate --
WATERS: Please do not instruct me as how I'm to conduct this committee.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
FOX: Now John, Trump has been very clear he is not handing over his tax returns. But I asked Richard Neal yesterday if he's going to continue asking, and he told me this fight is just beginning -- John.
BERMAN: All right. Lauren Fox for us on Capitol Hill. Thank you very much.
Joining us now is Julie Hirschfield Davis, congressional correspondent for "The New York Times."
What the heck happened, Julie, at the end there between Steve Mnuchin and Maxine Waters? I've never quite seen anything like that.
JULIE HIRSCHFIELD DAVIS, CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": I have never seen anything like that either. I kind of wondered whether Secretary Mnuchin had any examples of that on his little card that he brought.
It was pretty extraordinary that he even brought that, and that sort of tells you kind of all you need to know about the nature of the relationship here. He was anticipating being asked to answer more questions and stay longer than he wanted to. And he was ready to sort of take it to the chairwoman, Maxine Waters.
And as you saw, he was willing to push the envelope in terms of this -- the issues that the Democrats wanted to talk about. But he wasn't willing to just get up and walk out. He wanted her to adjourn the hearing and say that, you know, this was over. He didn't want to be in a position of stiffing the committee while they were in session.
But he also didn't want to give them all the time that they wanted. And so I think this was just a pretty vivid representation of how contentious the relationship has become. And you saw Maxine Waters say, you know, "This is the way it's going to be. We expect you to stay here and answer the questions."
BERMAN: Is this an example of what the administration can expect with this new Democratic oversight and perhaps an example of how they will respond, which is to say contentiously?
DAVIS: Well, yes. I mean, I think -- I think you saw both of those things. I think Democrats want to demonstrate very clearly that they plan to use their oversight power just as aggressively as they think is appropriate. And they want to get information out of this administration.
And this administration has also been very clear about how it's going to respond. They weren't sort of tiptoeing around the issue. You know, you've heard senior officials say, "We're not giving these tax returns." You heard Mick Mulvaney say over the weekend it will never happen. And there you saw Steve Mnuchin saying, you know, he wasn't going to roll over for the kind of, you know, aggressive approach that they are going to use.
BERMAN: Right.
DAVIS: So I think we're going to continue to see these kinds of clashes. [06:15:03] BERMAN: And one note of revelation, which is that treasury
lawyers have been speaking to White House lawyers about the taxes. We didn't know that. That's a level of consultation and maybe coordination. What's the significance?
DAVIS: We did not know that, and we don't know, based on what Steve Mnuchin said -- it was pretty vague -- exactly what the nature is of that consultation. We know they talked about the fact that they were expecting to get this request. And potentially, they may have talked about what the response should have been. And he said, you know, there's nothing inappropriate. I think until you know what the nature of the conversation is, you don't know whether there's anything inappropriate in that.
It's clear, though, that while there is supposed to be sort of a statute at play here, the White House has not been shy about the fact that they have a distinct point of view here. They do not believe the president should have to hand over these returns. He has no intention of doing that.
And so they're not even trying to pretend as if the White House is not weighing in on this question here. So the fact that the treasury secretary is admitting that, you know, the lawyers at his department have talked to the White House about this could potentially be pretty significant.
BERMAN: All right. Stay tuned on that front. Julie Hirschfield Davis, stick around. We're going to talk to you more in a little bit -- Alisyn.
CAMEROTA: All right, John. The attorney general's testimony leading to even more questions. Why did Bill Barr refuse to say if he'd briefed the White House on the Mueller report? We discuss that and so much more, John, next. I promise.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CAMEROTA: Attorney General Bill Barr will be back in the hot seat this morning, this time before a Senate panel. This comes as Washington braces for Barr to release his redacted version of the Mueller report within a week.
[06:20:06] Let's bring back Julie Hirschfield Davis and bring in Laura Coates, former federal prosecutor and CNN legal analyst; and Seung Min Kim, White House reporter for "The Washington Post."
Laura, when -- let me just play for everybody how Bill Barr was very reluctant to answer whether or not he had briefed the White House on the Mueller report. So let's just play this exchange that he had with Congresswoman Nita Lowey.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NITA LOWEY (D-NY): Did the White House see the report before you released your summarizing letter? Has the White House seen it since then? Have they been briefed on the contents beyond what was in your summarizing letter to the Judiciary Committee?
BARR: I've said what I'm going to say about the report today. I'm not going to say anything more about it until the report is out and everyone has a chance to look at it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Laura, why wouldn't he answer that? Would there be something legally wrong with him briefing the White House before the report is given to Congress?
LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I think there is every reason to answer that question. Because frankly, it's not actually about the substantive aspects of the report. It's about the process. And that's what everyone's trying to get at. The redaction process, the decision-making process to come to final conclusions. And also whether or not there is some coordination whatsoever between William Barr and President Trump.
Now, the reason that's very important is, of course, everyone is thinking to themselves, "Well, we have a 19-page letter written by Bill Barr when nobody asked him to saw anything and he had no information prior to even becoming attorney general." And the thought was that he had provided that as a form of a job interview.
So now, not to answer the question, I think, leaves that -- leaves you wondering that same question -- whether or not there is some form of coordination to have the, quote/unquote, non-summary -- he doesn't want you to call it a summary -- just a distillation of sorts, whether that was to inure to the benefit of the president.
I think he should have answered that question, because it just leaves another stone unturned that, frankly, undermines the integrity and credibility of the investigation. And actually, not the investigation but the summary of it.
BERMAN: The administration was on the record, the White House and the Justice Department, that there was no contact before the summary.
So what he seemed to dodge on there was contact since. I don't think there's anything illegal about contact. But politically speaking, Seung Min, it raises the possibility that the White House knows everything, and the president's lawyers know everything. They know all the obstruction information that might be in there that could be damning to the president; and they have a week's long, two weeks' long head start in how to respond to it.
SEUNG MIN KIM, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, "THE WASHINGTON POST": It gives Democrats an out to even escalate the fight further over getting that Mueller report.
I mean, one key point was that, yes, the attorney general would not say whether the White House had seen a copy of the report after the attorney general's letter.
Another point in the hearing yesterday was that the attorney general wasn't willing to say he would go to a judge to allow Congress to be able to see that grand jury material. Now House Democrats may do that on their own.
But if you look at all those points that's giving Democrats an out to say, "Well, you're not giving us the full report. You're not going as far as you can to accommodate us and the public and be able to have access to this document."
So that almost essentially guarantees a subpoena. Remember, the committee has already authorized a subpoena for the report and a vote earlier this month. And I think you can expect to see that vote pretty soon.
CAMEROTA: Julie, we had Jeffrey Toobin, our legal eagle, on and Preet Bharara on yesterday, and we asked the first question that they would ask, Bill Barr was. And I think they both said -- I'll summarize -- didn't they both say did Robert Mueller leave it up to you on obstruction?
BERMAN: Did he ask you --
CAMEROTA: To make a conclusion.
BERMAN: -- to weigh in, to make a conclusion.
CAMEROTA: Did he ask you to weigh in, make a conclusion, and offer it on obstruction?
But the lawmakers did not ask those brilliant -- that brilliant question yesterday. But what he did say about Mueller was -- and Mueller's team is, here's a little snippet of what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARR: I suspect that they probably wanted, you know, more put out. I felt that I should state the bottom-line conclusions. And I tried to use Special Counsel Mueller's own language in doing that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: Yes, they wanted more put out. They prepared their own summaries for public consumption.
DAVIES: Right. Absolutely. I mean, there is clearly a back and forth here between the attorney general and members of Mueller's team on how much to release, what to release.
And what's not clear -- and you're right, they did not ask about it to clarify yesterday, although I do assume that they're going to bring up those questions in the future, both with the attorney general and with Mueller himself when they have the chance to, whether attorney general Barr sort of got out over his skis, went further than it had been Mueller's intention for him to go and sort of drawing conclusions out of this report.
He was able to set the narrative and the -- sort of takeaway is very early on in the -- in the game by putting out that letter and sort of distilling what he says that were the conclusions of the report in his own words. And there are quite a few people, "The Times" reporting and others have found on the team who felt that, you know, that was not going to be what was going to happen. That more of the actual bottom-line findings of the report were going to come out in sort of -- just kind of a raw way that would allow people to make their own conclusions.
And while he said yesterday, the attorney general, that he hadn't talked with the special counsel about what was going to be in his letter, there is the remaining question of whether Bob Mueller expected or wanted the attorney general to draw his own conclusions or to leave that to Congress. And that's going to continue to be a question going forward that I think, you know, you'll definitely see the committee probe into further.
BERMAN: I think we're learning a lot more, Laura, about William Barr and his political acumen here, which I think is extensive. Because in his confirmation hearing, he said he would go as far as he can to be transparent.
I think what we're learning is he will go as far as he wants to be transparent. He is using the power that he has as attorney general to control how this is released. And sometimes it's short of what the law will allow.
COATES: I mean, it's good to be the king, right? That's the notion of this. And the idea that he is someone who is quickly politically savvy but also, you know, quite legally savvy, as well.
Remember, he's identified these four categories of information on areas that he would redact -- ongoing investigations, grand jury material, prejudicial to third-party peripheral parties, the idea of there being classified information.
This is actually far more sweeping and broad than you would initially think, because there's no guarantee, essentially, whether or not he's using his own discretion or the policy. Now, he's using his own discretion in combination with the policies of DOJ.
But if he's using own distraction to decide whether or not everything should be redacted, or certain portions of it, then he is flexing his power.
Having said that, of course, I think that he was very clear from the beginning that he would be transparent to the extent that he wanted to be so. But I think the assumption people from the confirmation hearing was that transparency at this level would be the floor, not the ceiling.
I think as we go forward, we'll have to figure out whether or not transparency, as defined by the public and Congress aligns with what his own definition. It seems at this point, it was the absolute ceiling aside from DOJ policy. Now, that's not going to satisfy members of Congress, let alone the public. CAMEROTA: Seung Min, we only have a couple seconds left. I think
that what Democrats are trying to figure out, and the public, is, is he impartial? Can he be impartial?
After that 19-page memo, it you know, lends itself to thinking that he cannot be. And so they're trying to determine yesterday and today if it's possible that he can be.
KIM: Yes. And Democrats have had this question around, essentially since he was nominated, and going through his confirmation process, because Democrats knew, obviously, that in the coming months, there would be this major fight over the Mueller investigation, over the Mueller report.
And they really cast a lot of doubt, had a lot of criticism about why he was writing memos about the Mueller probe when he wasn't even part of it and not privy to all the information about it. So that's why you're going to see the fight continue to escalate in the coming months.
BERMAN: All right. Seung Min, Laura, Julie, thank you very much. We didn't even get to ask about the "Grease" prequel.
CAMEROTA: OK. Luckily, we have two and a half more hours.
BERMAN: There's a lot more time. There's a lot more time to talk about that.
New trouble for Lori Loughlin. The actress and her husband hit with new charges in the college admissions scandal. We'll tell you why. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[06:30:00]
