circumstance, not by intention necessarily. so as for intentionally splitting up families, the only legal guidance there is on that was publicly floated by trump s own attorney general. listen. if you re smuggling a child, we will prosecute you. and that child will be separated from you probably as required by law. if you don t want your child to be separated, then don t bring them across the border illegally. it s not our fault that somebody does that. now, why does this matter? it matters because the law isn t the end. it is about how it is enforced. decisions on prosecution. that changes with each administration. look at jeff sessions. president trump also made a claim about the border wall and how far along it is. take a listen. we have started the wall. we are spending $1.6 billion between fixing and starting. you know, melissa, what s been going on?
something the white house later conceded. the president weighed in as any father would. reporter: donald jr. also repeatedly testified that he does not recall telling his father about the meeting. phone records show he called a blocked number before and after arranging the meeting and again on the date it occurred. democrats know that former campaign aide corey lewandowsky he previously testified that trump s primary residence has a blocked number. two days before the meeting, candidate teased about something that never happened. we will be discussing all the things that have taken place with the clintons. i think you will find it very informative and very, very interesting. and today is the one-year anniversary of when robert mueller was appointed as special counsel. it does remain to be seen if the president will comment on this since there has been confusion whether they will hold a previously planned news conference with the nato secretary today. it was on the nato secretar
plans to use this one-year anniversary to push special counsel to disclose how much money is being spent and to actively begin negotiating any possible interview with the president. chris and alisyn. appreciate it. let s bring in david gregg skpreu jeffrey toobin. we know this much. if the best argument you have is this is costing too much money. terms of political implications of one year, now, we know by precedent standards, one year is nothing. but what does it mean politically? i think it is a dark cloud over the presidency of president trump. he withstood the political heat this represents because he has really embraced the idea that they are out to get him. he played it well amongst his supporters, in congress, and the public. i think he s done a lot to bring
you can t subpoena him either. the interesting thing is not only does it not make sense legally, listen to what rudy guiliani said about this about a democrat in 1998. if the president is asked to testify, subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury and says no, not going to do it. you have to do it. you don t have a choice. the question took 45 seconds. that s the least of his problems. asking long questions. he was unequivocal about what a subpoena meant there. this is where giuliani s role in this has been such a curious choice. the one thing he is hammering away on is what you were alluding to, the political dimension of this. i m sure at some level trump
we re getting it up. amount of folks in california don t talk bit. they want the wall up. they re very happy. that s one of the reasons we started in california. but we made a lot of progress on it. the governor jerry brown says that s not true. it could be politics. we know there have been a few prototypes but the new wall has not in fact, been started. of course this will get to the definition of what started is. $1.6 billion is the number he got out of the original 25 that the president asked for. our accounting shows it has gone towards shoring up the existing wall and fence. trump showed off pictures in march. that was just fabrication. that was old fencing repairs that was going on. the plans for what were originally drawn up in 2009. so those are the facts. some of this stuff could be debated. we should do that right now. let s discuss all of it with ana