corruption, which the president said is his issue and many on capitol hill suspect was pretext for trying to get dirt on the bidens. back to you. joe johns at the white house, thank you on both of those fronts. let s talk about with susan glasser, staff writer for the new yorker and former federal prosecutor laura coates. susan, let me begin with you. if we were in the room today, as volker is answering these questions, this is the first actual witness in this official impeachment inquiry. what is the most important question to get a straight forward answer to? well, you know, the old watergate question is going to apply to all these witnesses which is what did you know and when did you know it? and the timeline is very significant here, both the timeline of kurt volker s interactions with rudy giuliani, which can establish what exactly was the nature of the what appears to be rogue foreign policy, that giuliani and trump were wanting. and what were his instructions
welcome back to dateline. i m craig melvin. rusty sneiderman s wife andrea took the stand in her boss murder trial, and prosecutors had some tough questions for her. here again is dennis murphy. he pretended to be my friend, and i was doing the best that i can to deal with that situation. and he had my whole life wrapped up. jurors had heard a harrowing tale from rusty sneiderman s widow of a monster of a boss who became obsessed with his new hire, andrea. but now the prosecution was suggesting that the toxic triangle among boss, employee, and husband, was even more complicated than it seemed. and that the wife, andrea, was holding back important details of her story. prosecutor don geary. there was this kind of watergate question. what did she know and when did she know it? we went in, we knew she was lying. we told her we knew she was lying and that didn t seem to affect her.
when dateline continues. i m dara brown. now back to dateline. welcome back to dateline. i m craig melvin. rusty sneiderman s wife andrea took the stand in her boss murder trial, and prosecutors had some tough questions for her. here again is dennis murphy. he pretended to be my friend, and i was doing the best that i can to deal with that situation. and he had my whole life wrapped up. jurors had heard a harrowing tale from rusty sneiderman s widow of a monster of a boss who became obsessed with his new hire, andrea. but now the prosecution was suggesting that the toxic triangle among boss, employee, and husband, was even more complicated than it seemed. and that the wife, andrea, was holding back important details of her story. prosecutor don geary. there was this kind of watergate question. what did she know and when did she know it? we went in, we knew she was lying.
inner circle. there s no proof yet that we know of, of a crime. but as laura said, it s harder and harder to imagine an innocent reason for all of this. and if there was a reason, then the question becomes, then why didn t the president and his aides and his lawyers tell us about that innocent reason over the last two years. but we don t know, rebecca, if the president knew about what manafort was up to. that s right. and that s obviously a key piece of this, wolf. because put the criminal side of this aside for a second, there s also, of course, the political side of this. and will the american people ultimately believe when the evidence is all out there, when the investigation is complete, that president trump was complicit in his scheme to work with russia, to become the next president of the united states. most americans would probably be uncomfortable with that. and that s why the president has repeatedly insisted that there was no collusion, that he had nothing to do with thi
well, it s not a surprise. i also don t think that in the end, from an evidentiary stand point, i don t think an interview with the president is going to add that much to what mueller already has, which i think is the body of evidence he has is i think quite substantial. giuliani says if they get a subpoena from mueller, they will fight it. we could fight like hell, his words. i guess they could. again, i m not sure what would actually be gained other than perhaps from an appearance or policy standpoint. from an evidentiary standpoint, i don t know that an interview would add much to what the body of evidence that i think mueller already has. because the key question i guess right now, we know what paul manafort has done, his own lawyers have confirmed it, releasing this sensitive information which was supposed