Rep. Eric Swalwell, <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/03/19/rep_eric_swalwell_on_russia_collusion_circumstantial_evidence_is_treated_the_same_as_direct_evidence_in_a_court_of_law.html">who said earlier this week that he believes President Trump colluded with Russia</a>, told MSNBC's "MTP Daily" on Friday afternoon that he will not accept the attorney general's version of the Mueller report "unless its veracity is testified to by Bob Mueller." "There will be a lot of questions as to whether he was pressured to wrap this up, if there was any political pressure put on him," Swalwell said of special counsel Mueller. "I think the country would benefit from hearing from Bob Mueller and not just taking the attorney general at his word." <blockquote>REP. ERIC SWALWELL: The American people will see every word, every comma, every period of this report. The president is outnumbered now in a way he was not before. We have the subpoena power and we have the precedents of the judiciary, so it is just a matter of time. But the American people gave us that power by giving us the majority, so we will see that report. Second, I don’t think I, and most of my colleagues, will accept a report unless its veracity is testified to by Bob Mueller. He, you know, there will be a lot of questions as to whether he was pressured to wrap this up, if there were any political pressure put on him. CHUCK TODD, NBC NEWS: Do you want him subpoenaed if Mueller won't testify? You would compel Mueller to testify if he doesn't want to testify? SWALWELL: I'll leave that to our chairman, but I believe we need to hear from Bob Mueller. I think the country would benefit from hearing from Bob Mueller and not just taking the attorney general at his word. Because there have been too many issues with this president and the way that acting attorney generals have come in, and even this attorney general who sent an unsolicited letter about the Mueller report, but what we do now with this report will very much determine whether or not the rule of law still stands. CHUCK TODD: This report was concluded without interviewing the president of the U.S. in front of a grand jury. There were plenty of legal reasons perhaps, Bob Mueller decided not to go through with that. Will that be known as a mistake or not? SWALWELL: I believe the president will have no credibility to attack the report because the state of the evidence will not include his testimony. He was given the questions, he had an opportunity to go in and sit in that chair. He did not, and so the state of the evidence does not include his testimony. And so I don't think he can credibly attack the report. </blockquote>