inflection point? we have the manafort verdict coming. possible charges against michael cohen. whatever mueller is going to decide. or frankly, i mean, i feel like i ve asked that question a million times over this presidency. i think that s right, every day s an inflection point of some sort for this presidency. as i ve always maintained, i have great faith in robert mueller, we don t know what he has up his sleeve. when i look at it, the context of the don mcgahn testimony everyone s making comparisons to watergate, i think that s wrong. if you read the externals of what mueller s doing, it looks much more like a classic justice department investigation of a mob boss. you can t get the mob boss, because he didn t pull the trigger, so you go after the money, you go after the tax evasion, money laundering, you go after bank fraud.
actually. reporter: the president now echoing the concerns of his attorney rudy giuliani, that an interview could be a, quote, perjury trap. saying, it s my word against comey. and he s best friends with mueller. so mueller might say, well, i believe comey and even if i m telling the truth, that makes me a liar. that s no good. how do we know what the truth is? you re talking about whether or not the president asked james comey to go easy on michael flynn. that s right. they will possibly charge him with perjury should he give that answer. that s why i m saying, in situations like this, the prosecutors, the truth is relative. reporter: the debate over an interview coming as sources tell cnn that the president was unsubtled that he did not know that the conversations between the white house counsel don mcgahn and mueller lasted 30 hours over several months or that his legal team did not conduct a full debriefing with mcgahn after the fact.
joke, by the way. that s how young i am. you re still getting to that point. that s okay. but the point is no, but the point is, look, the way i read trump, this is classic trump. he wants credit for something that he doesn t really have the power to do. right. i can take this over if i wanted, but i have not done that. i have let this process go forward because i have nothing to hide. i mean, it is similar to the mcgahn situation for which he does deserve some credit. he waived the executive privilege to allow him to testify. that may be a bad thing and now he s upset about how much he may have told special prosecutor he doesn t know about that could actually hurt him. so, yes, he can fire the attorney general. he could fire rod rosenstein, but the reality is he, as a practical matter, he can t do that without huge political blow back and he hasn t done it because he knows it s incredibly unwise to do it, but he ll come right up to that line and try to get credit for all of
president, but he contributed to the matrix of showing the president s obstruction of justice in a very, very definitive way as well as showing the collusion well, we actually, i think we do know some of it, and some of it has been reported. part of that is indeed about what happened. i ll give you one example. and i think we can reliably say that mcgahn talked about attempts to fire attorney general sessions, by reince priebus, was asked by the president to fire attorney general sessions. or obtain his resignation. and priebus refused. a few days later, priebus was out. now, in a skeletal form, that