Journalist Carl Bernstein on Sunday expressed doubts that President TrumpDonald John TrumpO'Rourke: Trump driving global, U.S. economy into recession Manchin: Trump has 'golden opportunity' on gun reforms Objections to Trump's new immigration rule wildly exaggerated MORE would sit down for an interview with special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerTrump calls for probe of Obama book deal Democrats express private disappointment with Mueller testimony Kellyanne Conway: 'I'd like to know' if Mueller read his own report MORE, citing the president’s “compulsive, continual lying.”

“I think many of us will believe it when we see him sit down with Mueller. Look, we have no reason to believe almost anything that [Trump] says. What is so extraordinary about him and his presidency is the incessant, compulsive, continual lying,” Bernstein said on CNN.

“We’ve never had a president who lies like this, certainly in the modern era. Even Nixon,” the Watergate reporter added.


Bernstein’s comments come as speculation swirls over whether Trump will sit down for an interview with Mueller as part of the special counsel’s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

Trump has publicly said he’s willing to speak with Mueller under oath. However, his lawyers are urging the president not to sit down with Mueller, citing concerns he could be charged with lying to investigators during the interview.

Bernstein said Sunday that Trump’s consistent lying should concern Republicans. The former journalist said some Republican lawmakers appear to be “forming a bodyguard around the president” instead of protecting Mueller’s investigation.

Several Republican lawmakers have in recent weeks pointed to a GOP-crafted memo and texts between two FBI officials as evidence that the Justice Department and Mueller’s investigation are biased against Trump.

While some lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have expressed interest in passing legislation to protect Mueller from being fired, Republican leaders have said such a bill is unnecessary.