Phil mattingly, thank you so much. Dana bash who used to run up and down those halls for years and years and years. Phil has talked to folks on both sides of the aisle. Confident that the house will get to this and nancy pelosi was so key in brokering this deal why is she standing there now for fourplus hours and saying no . I saw you write that down and because youre you, is why you picked up what you did about nancy pelosi. To people at home, it makes no sense. Not at all. Because shes getting attention for the issue shes upset is not in there. She understood because she is as sort of seasoned and tough as a legislator as they come, that at the end of the day, we saw what happened in the senate a few weeks ago. They tried to use the Immigration Issue as leverage for keeping the government open and it didnt work. Shut the government down. It didnt work out so politically, at least in the short term, for democrats. Nancy pelosi is making using the megaphone that she has by saying, you
rid of this hereditary barrier to occupancy of the white house, that is, race? during the obama candidacy, there was a word that was in vogue. there were a lot of people, people of influence, talking about the notion that america might be entering a post-racial status. post-racial is an interesting word. it was a new word. it was not part of the american vernacular. it s interesting why we as a society embraced that word. was it hope that maybe race would be less important? was it hubris? were we deluded? i think that when you study history, every time we made a step forward, there was always a backlash. we go from lincoln s
allowed the oversight committee and us to do our investigation unimpeded by the prospect of executive privilege we can get at the email. we can get at the documents. now we can bring witnesses in and have hearings and so forth. why do you think, when we re all playing this out the way things have gone in the last four years, there is an assumption with me and some other people who thought there will be some injunction forgetting these notes released, that they will act on. it and they did. is it hubris, do they think that there s anything wrong with it? how do you think that these notes one from being reported and leaked to your committee as fast as they did? i don t know all the behind the scenes action, but i do know is richard donahue and the authors of these notes knew exactly what they were doing and taking them because they knew that what was going on was didn t meet the smell test, to
otezla. show more of you. welcome back. in our last episode of keeping up with the president s legal strategy, the lawyers were telling the client, don t do it. as in, don t grant an interview to the special counsel robert mueller. today, a new plot twist. call it hubris, conviction, or naivety, the president is raising the possibility he ll ignore his counsel and do it anyway. quote, he thinks he can work this, a source familiar with the president s thinking tells cnn. he doesn t realize how high the stakes are. cnn s sara murray broke this story and joins us now. seems everyone in the president s orbit, his lawyers, his friends, his allies, say don t do it. but reporter: but, you know, it s not necessarily clear that the president will ignore all of these people. he s not, you know, immune to what his friends and allies are
especially in a case like this. this is not the beginning of the investigation where the special counsel s office is simply trying to gather they already have a lot of facts. the purpose is to confront him with those facts. the missing link is the intent of the president. the only way the special counsel s office really gets to that intent is to interview the president. so there s no legal reason for doing it. any lawyer worth his salt or her salt would never let the president go into an interview like that. so you talked about your different kinds of clients who went in and thought they could talk themselves out of it. in this case we re talking about the president. is it hubris? absolutely. what are you going to do? convince the special counsel s office that they re bronco whatever conclusions they ve made? we don t know what conclusions they ve made but they have reviewed a lot of evidence. they know things the president presumably does not know about what other witnesses like