Private tensions between Justice Department leaders and Robert Mueller's team broke into public view in extraordinary fashion Wednesday as Attorney General William Barr pushed back at the special counsel's "snitty" complaints over his handling of the Trump-Russia investigation report.

Testifying for the first time since releasing Mueller's report, Barr said he was surprised Mueller did not reach a conclusion on whether President Donald Trump had tried to obstruct justice, and that he had felt compelled to step in with his own judgment that the president had committed no crime.

Barr was also perturbed by a private letter Mueller sent him last month complaining that the attorney general had not properly portrayed the special counsel's finding.

Barr called the note "a bit snitty."

"I said 'Bob, what's with the letter? Just pick up the phone and call me if there is an issue,'" Barr said.

The airing of disagreements over the handling of the report followed Mueller's two-year investigation into Russian interference to help Trump in the 2016 campaign and the possibility that Trump's team conspired with the Russians.

During most of the investigation, the Justice Department and Mueller's team seemed to be unified in approach.

Republican and Democratic lawmakers have been anything but unified.

And their partisan divide was on full display during Wednesday's contentious Judiciary Committee hearing, which included three Democratic presidential candidates.

Some Republicans, in addition to defending Trump, focused on the president's 2016 Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton's email and campaign practices and what they argued has been a lack of investigation of them.

Democrats, for their part, moved to exploit the daylight between Barr and Mueller to attack the attorney general's credibility and accuse him of unduly spinning the special counsel's report in the president's favor.

Barr sought to minimize the rift by suggesting the special counsel's concerns were largely about process, not substance.

Barr's appearance gave him his most extensive opportunity to explain the department's actions, including his news conference held before the Mueller report's release.

Barr has also been invited to appear Thursday before the Democratic-led House Judiciary panel, but the Justice Department has said he would not testify if the committee insisted on having its lawyers question him.

Neither side broke much new ground Wednesday on the specifics of Mueller's investigation, though Barr did articulate a robust defense of Trump as he made clear his firm conviction that there was no prosecutable case against the president for obstruction of justice.

POOL

Washington DC - 1 May 2019

1. Wide, Senate Judiciary Committee

2. SOUNDBITE: (English) Sen. Cory Booker, Democrat - New Jersey:

"We right now have a new normal in our country. We have a document that shows over 200 hundred attempts, connections between a presidential campaign and a foreign adversary sharing information that would be illegal if you did it with a super PAC. We know that. (Barr: What information was shared?)  The polling data was shared sir. It's in the report I can cite you the page. (Barr: With who?) And I guess my point here is is that your willingness to seem to brush over this and use words like the American people should be grateful. What's in this report? Nobody should be grateful."

3. Back view of hearing

4. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"Sen. Kamala Harris: Attorney General Barr has the president or anyone at the White House ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone?

Umm, I wouldn't I wouldn't.

Harris: Yes or no.

Could you repeat that question?"

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Sen. Kamala Harris, Democrat - California:

"I will repeat it. Has the president or anyone at the White House ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone? Yes or no please sir?"

6. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"The president or anybody else.

Harris: Seems you'd remember something like that and be able to tell us.

Yeah but I'm trying to grapple with the words suggest. I mean there have been discussions of of matters out there that they have not asked me to open investigation but  ...

Harris: Perhaps they've suggested?

I don't know, I wouldn't say suggest.

Harris: Hinted? Inferred?"

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Sen. Kamala Harris, Democrat - California:

"Is in reaching your conclusion did you personally review all of the underlying evidence?"

8. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"No. We took and  ...

Harris: Did Mr. Rosenstein?

No we accepted the statements in the report as the factual record. We did not go underneath it to see whether or not they were accurate. We accepted it as accurate."

9. SOUNDBITE (English) Sen. Kamala Harris, Democrat - California:

"As the Attorney General of the United States. You run the United States Department of Justice. If in any U.S. attorney's office around the country, the head of that office when being asked to make a critical decision about in this case the person who holds the highest office in the land and whether or not that person committed a crime, would you accept them recommending a charging decision to you if they had not reviewed the evidence?

Barr: Well that's a question for Bob Mueller. He's the U.S. attorney. He's the one who presents the report.

But it was you who made the charging decision, sir? You made the decision not to charge the president."

10. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"In a pross (process) memo and then a declination memo.

Harris: You said it was your baby, what did you mean by that?

It was my baby to to let to decide whether or not to disclose it to the public

Harris: And whose decision was it? Who had the power to make the decision about whether or not the evidence was sufficient to make a determination of whether there had been an obstruction of justice?

Prosecution memos go up to the supervisor, in this case it was the the attorney general and the deputy attorney general who who decide on the final decision."

11. SOUNDBITE (English) Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Democrat - Minnesota:

"Mr. Attorney General, on April 27th President Trump stated 'Mueller, I assume for 35 million dollars he checked my taxes and he checked my financials.' Is that accurate? Did the special counsel review the president's taxes and the Trump Organization's financial statements?"

12. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"I don't know.

Klobuchar: Can you find out if I ask later in a written question?

I, yes or you could ask Bob Mueller when he comes here.

Klobuchar: OK I'll do that too."

13. SOUNDBITE (English) Sen. Richard Blumenthal, Democrat - Connecticut:

"In fact in response to your question 'why not just pick up the phone,' this letter was an extraordinary act. A career prosecutor rebuking the attorney general of the United States, memorializing in writing. Right? I know of no other instance of that happening. Do you?"

14. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"I don't consider Bob at this stage a career prosecutor. He's had a career as a prosecutor.

Blumenthal: Well, he's a very eminent prosecutor.

He was the head of the FBI for 12 years.

Blumenthal: He's a career a law enforcement professional, right? Yeah I know of no other instance of ...

But he was also political appointee and he was a political appointee with me at the Department of Justice. I don't know the letters a bit snitty and I think it was probably written by one of his staff people."

15. SOUNDBITE (English) Sen. Richard Blumenthal, Democrat - Connecticut:

"Did you make a memorandum of your conversation? Did you make a memorandum"

Barr: I didn't.

Did anyone, either you or anyone on your staff memorialize your conversation with Robert Mueller?"

16. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"Yes.

Blumenthal: Who did that?

Barr: There were notes taken of the call.

Blumenthal: May we have those notes?

Barr: No

Blumethal: Why not?"

Barr: Why should you have them."

16. Pan, Barr leaving hearing

Private tensions between Justice Department leaders and Robert Mueller's team broke into public view in extraordinary fashion Wednesday as Attorney General William Barr pushed back at the special counsel's "snitty" complaints over his handling of the Trump-Russia investigation report.

Testifying for the first time since releasing Mueller's report, Barr said he was surprised Mueller did not reach a conclusion on whether President Donald Trump had tried to obstruct justice, and that he had felt compelled to step in with his own judgment that the president had committed no crime.

Barr was also perturbed by a private letter Mueller sent him last month complaining that the attorney general had not properly portrayed the special counsel's finding.

Barr called the note "a bit snitty."

"I said 'Bob, what's with the letter? Just pick up the phone and call me if there is an issue,'" Barr said.

The airing of disagreements over the handling of the report followed Mueller's two-year investigation into Russian interference to help Trump in the 2016 campaign and the possibility that Trump's team conspired with the Russians.

During most of the investigation, the Justice Department and Mueller's team seemed to be unified in approach.

Republican and Democratic lawmakers have been anything but unified.

And their partisan divide was on full display during Wednesday's contentious Judiciary Committee hearing, which included three Democratic presidential candidates.

Some Republicans, in addition to defending Trump, focused on the president's 2016 Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton's email and campaign practices and what they argued has been a lack of investigation of them.

Democrats, for their part, moved to exploit the daylight between Barr and Mueller to attack the attorney general's credibility and accuse him of unduly spinning the special counsel's report in the president's favor.

Barr sought to minimize the rift by suggesting the special counsel's concerns were largely about process, not substance.

Barr's appearance gave him his most extensive opportunity to explain the department's actions, including his news conference held before the Mueller report's release.

Barr has also been invited to appear Thursday before the Democratic-led House Judiciary panel, but the Justice Department has said he would not testify if the committee insisted on having its lawyers question him.

Neither side broke much new ground Wednesday on the specifics of Mueller's investigation, though Barr did articulate a robust defense of Trump as he made clear his firm conviction that there was no prosecutable case against the president for obstruction of justice.

POOL

Washington DC - 1 May 2019

1. Wide, Senate Judiciary Committee

2. SOUNDBITE: (English) Sen. Cory Booker, Democrat - New Jersey:

"We right now have a new normal in our country. We have a document that shows over 200 hundred attempts, connections between a presidential campaign and a foreign adversary sharing information that would be illegal if you did it with a super PAC. We know that. (Barr: What information was shared?) The polling data was shared sir. It's in the report I can cite you the page. (Barr: With who?) And I guess my point here is is that your willingness to seem to brush over this and use words like the American people should be grateful. What's in this report? Nobody should be grateful."

3. Back view of hearing

4. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"Sen. Kamala Harris: Attorney General Barr has the president or anyone at the White House ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone?

Umm, I wouldn't I wouldn't.

Harris: Yes or no.

Could you repeat that question?"

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Sen. Kamala Harris, Democrat - California:

"I will repeat it. Has the president or anyone at the White House ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone? Yes or no please sir?"

6. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"The president or anybody else.

Harris: Seems you'd remember something like that and be able to tell us.

Yeah but I'm trying to grapple with the words suggest. I mean there have been discussions of of matters out there that they have not asked me to open investigation but ...

Harris: Perhaps they've suggested?

I don't know, I wouldn't say suggest.

Harris: Hinted? Inferred?"

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Sen. Kamala Harris, Democrat - California:

"Is in reaching your conclusion did you personally review all of the underlying evidence?"

8. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"No. We took and ...

Harris: Did Mr. Rosenstein?

No we accepted the statements in the report as the factual record. We did not go underneath it to see whether or not they were accurate. We accepted it as accurate."

9. SOUNDBITE (English) Sen. Kamala Harris, Democrat - California:

"As the Attorney General of the United States. You run the United States Department of Justice. If in any U.S. attorney's office around the country, the head of that office when being asked to make a critical decision about in this case the person who holds the highest office in the land and whether or not that person committed a crime, would you accept them recommending a charging decision to you if they had not reviewed the evidence?

Barr: Well that's a question for Bob Mueller. He's the U.S. attorney. He's the one who presents the report.

But it was you who made the charging decision, sir? You made the decision not to charge the president."

10. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"In a pross (process) memo and then a declination memo.

Harris: You said it was your baby, what did you mean by that?

It was my baby to to let to decide whether or not to disclose it to the public

Harris: And whose decision was it? Who had the power to make the decision about whether or not the evidence was sufficient to make a determination of whether there had been an obstruction of justice?

Prosecution memos go up to the supervisor, in this case it was the the attorney general and the deputy attorney general who who decide on the final decision."

11. SOUNDBITE (English) Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Democrat - Minnesota:

"Mr. Attorney General, on April 27th President Trump stated 'Mueller, I assume for 35 million dollars he checked my taxes and he checked my financials.' Is that accurate? Did the special counsel review the president's taxes and the Trump Organization's financial statements?"

12. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"I don't know.

Klobuchar: Can you find out if I ask later in a written question?

I, yes or you could ask Bob Mueller when he comes here.

Klobuchar: OK I'll do that too."

13. SOUNDBITE (English) Sen. Richard Blumenthal, Democrat - Connecticut:

"In fact in response to your question 'why not just pick up the phone,' this letter was an extraordinary act. A career prosecutor rebuking the attorney general of the United States, memorializing in writing. Right? I know of no other instance of that happening. Do you?"

14. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"I don't consider Bob at this stage a career prosecutor. He's had a career as a prosecutor.

Blumenthal: Well, he's a very eminent prosecutor.

He was the head of the FBI for 12 years.

Blumenthal: He's a career a law enforcement professional, right? Yeah I know of no other instance of ...

But he was also political appointee and he was a political appointee with me at the Department of Justice. I don't know the letters a bit snitty and I think it was probably written by one of his staff people."

15. SOUNDBITE (English) Sen. Richard Blumenthal, Democrat - Connecticut:

"Did you make a memorandum of your conversation? Did you make a memorandum"

Barr: I didn't.

Did anyone, either you or anyone on your staff memorialize your conversation with Robert Mueller?"

16. SOUNDBITE (English) William Barr, Attorney General:

"Yes.

Blumenthal: Who did that?

Barr: There were notes taken of the call.

Blumenthal: May we have those notes?

Barr: No

Blumethal: Why not?"

Barr: Why should you have them."

16. Pan, Barr leaving hearing

Within minutes of receiving notification that special counsel Robert Mueller had turned over his report on the Russia investigation, congressional Democrats were calling for the report to be fully released, including the underlying evidence. They have threatened subpoenas if it is not.

The demands are setting up a potential tug of war between congressional Democrats and President Donald Trump's administration that federal judges might eventually have to referee.

Six Democratic committee chairmen wrote in a letter to Attorney General William Barr on Friday that if Mueller has any reason to believe that Trump "has engaged in criminal or other serious misconduct," then the Justice Department should not conceal it.

"The president is not above the law and the need for public faith in our democratic institutions and the rule of law must be the priority," the chairmen wrote.

Reacting to the release, Democratic Congressman Ted Lieu, who serves on the Judiciary Committee, told the Associated Press that "the American people paid for this report," adding "both American people and Congress have a right to see the full report. "

Lieu said although the special counsel report focused on Russia, the findings could also be used in a wide array of Judicary Committee investigations.

It's unclear what Mueller has found related to the president, or if any of it would be damning. In his investigation of whether President Donald Trump's campaign coordinated with Russia to sway the 2016 election, Mueller has already brought charges against 34 people, including six aides and advisers to the president, and three companies.

Lawmakers say they need the underlying evidence - including interviews, documents and material turned over to the grand jury - because the Justice Department has maintained that a president cannot be indicted, and also that derogatory information cannot be released about people who have not been charged. So if the investigation did find evidence incriminating against Trump, they may not be able to release it, under their own guidelines.

The Democrats say that it could be tantamount to a cover-up if the department did not let Congress and the public know what they found.

Washington - 22 March 2019

1. Wide, exterior view of Department of Justice

Los Angeles - 3 May 2018

2. STILL Image, Rep. Ted Lieu, Democrat - California, Member of House Judiciary Committee

Torrence, California - 22 March 2019

3. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Ted Lieu, Democrat - California: ++ AUDIO ONLY++

"Today is a proud day for America. Despite many attempts by Donald Trump to block this investigation Robert Mueller and his team were able to complete it. The fact that Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein kept their jobs I think is a strong testament to the vitality and strength of our institutions. This was a Republican led investigation of a Republican president and it was allowed to continue. I think that says a lot about America."

Washington - 22 March 2019

4. Wide, exterior view of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's office

Torrence, California - 22 March 2019

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Ted Lieu, Democrat - California: ++ AUDIO ONLY++

"Now in terms of distribution, the American people paid for this report. It is a matter of intense national interest and under both the separation of powers as well as just general fairness and transparency, both American people and Congress have a right to see the full report. "

Washington - 22 March 2019

6. Wide, exterior view of Department of Justice ++NIGHT SHOT++

Torrence, California - 22 March 2019

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Ted Lieu, Democrat - California: ++ AUDIO ONLY++

"It's hard to know without knowing what's in the actual report. It's also important to understand that because the Department of Justice has taken the position that they won't indict a sitting president then the only other institution that can hold the press accountable is Congress. And we can't do that if we don't see the full report. So, that at every level when you look at it from separation of powers or the functions of both Congress and the special counsel in this case, the different functions we have to see the entire report."

Washington - 22 March 2019

8. Wide, people standing in front of White House

9. Close-up protester

Torrence, California - 22 March 2019

10. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Ted Lieu, Democrat - California: ++ AUDIO ONLY++

"Special Counsel Mueller's investigation was largely centered on Russia. The House Judiciary Committee and other committees were interested in knowing did Donald Trump, his family, his associates commit any crime? Second, did they engage in any ethical misconduct, whether or not it rose to the level of a federal crime? And third how do we explain this to the American people to keep it from happening again?"

Washington - 22 March 2019

11. Wide, tourists walking in front of White House

12. Wide, White House ++NIGHT SHOT++

Within minutes of receiving notification that special counsel Robert Mueller had turned over his report on the Russia investigation, US congressional Democrats were calling for the report to be fully released, including the underlying evidence. They have threatened subpoenas if it is not.

The demands are setting up a potential tug of war between congressional Democrats and US President Donald Trump's administration that federal judges might eventually have to referee.

Six Democratic committee chairmen wrote in a letter to Attorney General William Barr on Friday that if Mueller has any reason to believe that Trump "has engaged in criminal or other serious misconduct," then the Justice Department should not conceal it.

"The president is not above the law and the need for public faith in our democratic institutions and the rule of law must be the priority," the chairmen wrote.

Reacting to the release, Democratic Congressman Ted Lieu, who serves on the Judiciary Committee, told the Associated Press that "the American people paid for this report," adding "both American people and Congress have a right to see the full report. "

Lieu said although the special counsel report focused on Russia, the findings could also be used in a wide array of Judicary Committee investigations.

It's unclear what Mueller has found related to the president, or if any of it would be damning. In his investigation of whether President Donald Trump's campaign coordinated with Russia to sway the 2016 election, Mueller has already brought charges against 34 people, including six aides and advisers to the president, and three companies.

Lawmakers say they need the underlying evidence - including interviews, documents and material turned over to the grand jury - because the Justice Department has maintained that a president cannot be indicted, and also that derogatory information cannot be released about people who have not been charged. So if the investigation did find evidence incriminating against Trump, they may not be able to release it, under their own guidelines.

The Democrats say that it could be tantamount to a cover-up if the department did not let Congress and the public know what they found.

Washington DC - 22 March 2019

1. Wide, exterior view of Department of Justice

Los Angeles - 3 May 2018

2. STILL Rep. Ted Lieu, Democrat - California, Member of House Judiciary Committee

Torrence, California - 22 March 2019

3. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Ted Lieu, Democrat - California: ++ AUDIO ONLY++

"Today is a proud day for America. Despite many attempts by Donald Trump to block this investigation Robert Mueller and his team were able to complete it. The fact that Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein kept their jobs I think is a strong testament to the vitality and strength of our institutions. This was a Republican led investigation of a Republican president and it was allowed to continue. I think that says a lot about America."

Washington DC - 22 March 2019

4. Wide, exterior view of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's office

Torrence, California - 22 March 2019

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Ted Lieu, Democrat - California: ++ AUDIO ONLY++

"Now in terms of distribution, the American people paid for this report. It is a matter of intense national interest and under both the separation of powers as well as just general fairness and transparency, both American people and Congress have a right to see the full report."

Washington DC - 22 March 2019

6. Wide, exterior view of Department of Justice ++NIGHT SHOT++

Torrence, California - 22 March 2019

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Ted Lieu, Democrat - California: ++ AUDIO ONLY++

"It's hard to know without knowing what's in the actual report. It's also important to understand that because the Department of Justice has taken the position that they won't indict a sitting president then the only other institution that can hold the press accountable is Congress. And we can't do that if we don't see the full report. So, that at every level when you look at it from separation of powers or the functions of both Congress and the special counsel in this case, the different functions we have to see the entire report."

Washington DC - 22 March 2019

8. Wide, people standing in front of White House

9. Close-up protester

Torrence, California - 22 March 2019

10. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Ted Lieu, Democrat - California: ++ AUDIO ONLY++

"Special Counsel Mueller's investigation was largely centered on Russia. The House Judiciary Committee and other committees were interested in knowing did Donald Trump, his family, his associates commit any crime? Second, did they engage in any ethical misconduct, whether or not it rose to the level of a federal crime? And third how do we explain this to the American people to keep it from happening again?"

Washington DC - 22 March 2019

11. Wide, tourists walking in front of White House

12. Wide, White House ++NIGHT SHOT++