Paul Manafort Paul Manafort, Bob Muller, President Trump discussed on Steve Cochran

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

Do we know what we do? Not know it Senate. Here's the thing. I'm thrown it in. But I said yesterday, we have to know what's in it to give it the team is keeping. Tony Esposito socks or something from the last game that he played. Yeah. I'm not I'm not sure they're keeping tight-lipped on the prize pack includes but you're gonna get it with the jersey. If you're the seventh glowing listens every morning as do most of the Blackhawks and that fine organization, Pete call Sandberg, and let us know it's in the price back sheriff. He's got other things to do. Then. However, the jersey it pays homage to the nineteen thirty four black and white Blackhawks uniform, highlighting the Blackhawks crest and the heritage felt material. What was the guy's name, Justin? That was on a thirty four Blackhawks was mush March mush March mush March one of the great Blackhawks one of the great and Rosie couture one. Anyway. So you're going to get that Anna prize pack promises to be amazing. Yes. Seven Colorado tour, great forward and a fashion mogul, right? There's no question. Yeah. For wonderful sent Pat Brady in your years as a prosecutor and chasing bad guys around you had to analyze evidence. And there were certain rules of law that you had to follow. So first off what is it joint defense agreement when there is an investigation of multiple people or indictment against multiple defendants. The defense team can talk to one another without waiting the attorney client privilege, the privilege is this. If you make a statement that might hurt you like dragnet, right? Wherever you say. Maybe against you. Nice old guy reference. Yes. The attorney client privilege allows you to make statements that might be incriminating to your lawyer because you want to promote a free flow of communication. So you can have a good defense when you have multiple defendants they intern these joint defense agreement so they can share information. But what happened with? I'm sorry. I was gonna say leading the Paul Manafort Paul Manafort had JD join defense agreement, but Paul Manafort, then took a deal took a deal with Bob Muller. When you take a deal. Can you still have your attorneys talk to other people typically the joint defense agreements and writing and it says the minute you Bill began cooperation with the government you're out of the team, which makes sense because you can't be talking to the governor and talking to your team. But this this case, it seems to have gone the other way where they were messing around with Mahler. Do you put any stock into the argument that we've heard just ad nauseam over the past few days? That Muller was operating some high level game to get Manafort to perjure himself or to get Trump to perjure himself that would lead to this or that. And eventually he'd be able to close the door listening know, you always hear that perjury trap. Or Trump says it's a trip. They just don't operate that way. Particularly a guy like Bob Muller, which violates legal ethics. It certainly violates your role as a press the role the prosecutor is to administer Justice means finding the truth and then determine whether or not should be charged not play games and try to trap people. So when you hear the president or anybody else say that that's what they're doing. It's nonsense particularly guy like Muller who's the patriots been doing this a long long time. And that means that the this is going to play out the way it plays out. But it could also mean that will never see this report that Muller is is going to release or Willie. I don't it's no question. I can't imagine that we wouldn't. But either way, and this is where I think the president put himself in a trick back. There's going to be a congressional investigation that Moiseev testify present testimony to so a lot of that information is probably gonna come out whether be leaked out it'll get out if it gets in the political process, the overall this this past week from your perch, how do you look at this the idea that the Muller team wants to to quickly go to sentencing because of the the way that they say that Manafort broke their deal or lied, and they they haven't been lie, and and that Muller may possibly be able to show some of his evidence in in corporate seeings, how how do you see what's happened this week in the grand scheme of the store? You have Pat Brady on a perch. She's got a perch over there. Don't snap the twin for catching that, Sandra. No, I I don't put much into all this week about that. This is going to reveal where Muller is going. I don't think that's as objective that they would set up the scheme to to do it. Didn't it doesn't make any sense. I mean, these guys operate member Ken Starr, the nineties every morning, you'd see them walking out this little Starbucks couplets. And every day we knew it was going on with temporary molars holed up somewhere in Virginia. Nobody ever sees the team. Nobody hears him. There's there's very little to no leaks. So this these schemes that they come up with. And I was watching the news last time. This is all nonsense. I told you before my first case ever as well man on the totem pole was with Bob Muller on a very significant case, inviting indicted, a very significant individual, and I came to the conclusion that the government can conspire to order paperclips. Let alone come up with a scheme. It just doesn't work that way. Plus the agents to defend the FBI when the president goes after FBI agents are patriots. They would allow nonsense. They're two exceptions. We've seen in this case. Obviously, it just doesn't work that way these are career. But I would even argue that the two exceptions you're talking about we're caught out of context. I mean, you know, you can talk all day about whether or not they should have had affairs shouldn't have had affairs. But the clips that were pulled the texts that were released on the game that FOX played made him sound like they were involved in elaborate scheme to take Donald Trump. It just is not true. It was out of context. But it was also stupid agent. You should know listen to get a job to be an FBI agent. You're sworn peace officer. You should take these things more serious apply. Why do you think Manafort lied her over? I think I do I know. No, do I know by reputation, I think his whole life. So why and it's not surprising that he would do this. I think part of it. And this is just my opinion. Trump's sending these smoke signals that he's going to pardon people. Like he did last night. That's a hell of a risk to make though. I mean, it really is nine years old. I'm not talking about Trump talk about Manafort, if you're sixty nine years old, and you think you could stay take this deal. And maybe you get three years became maybe you get five drought by seventy five. Now, he's rolling the dice that he's gonna get pardoned for the guy that has shown the president has shown. No loyalty to anybody. That's been loyal to him. It depends on the day. So the idea that I'd go Donald Trump will definitely come through for me. That's crazy. Yeah. I think maybe if he's not in jeopardy anymore. There might be more metaphor could speak more freely. So that's another risk. But just by the via the way they violated. This defense agreement makes me think they're operating and Trump world not in the normal world. And I've said all along the president seems to treat the Justice department and Bob Muller, like they're low level, New Jersey gaming. I mean, this is the Justice department. We're talking about basically interfering with our elections and whether his campaign participated in it. I can't think of matters more serious the pardon question. And I read this great piece about this this week that if pardoned it's a federal pardon states would still have the option to go after Paul Manafort, and they would and it also means that he would open himself up to testify in front of congress without the ability to to use the v necks jeopardy. Exact. So the question would be that seems like it would not necessarily be the thing that Paul Manafort would want whereas making the point he would be has to speak because he's not. You can't compel somebody to speak amendment for protects that so that creates problems for him. But I think in the everybody's take a deep breath and take a step back this investigations proceeding. Exactly. Like I've seen him before. And the thing I would think that would be disturbing to me. And the White House are close is. Now, we're starting to get to actually maybe there is some evidence of conspiracy. And there's some actual conversations that went on that might be. I've never thought they were going to be able to prove that this conspiracy. At least at the why. Now, you think it's I think it's pod. But here's the thing as watching those come together. Typical defense for the guy at the top. Like, if you see these big white collar cases like even Enron Ken Lay says, why didn't know what was going on. There comes a certain point when there's enough evidence. Where no matter what you say about. I didn't know what was going on. The jury is going to assume you know, what was going on. I am has met last thing. They're still at the Justice department policy. That says don't indict a sitting president, and it's still unsettled law, weather or night, the Justice department can't actually a president our constitution. Well, that'd be a real test of the politics of the supreme court would well was briefed and argued in the Nixon era, but they never ruled some it would be it would be an fast b be I I'll be a constitutional crisis, which we don't need. But it would be a fascinating. Discussion. Would it be? Would you see not going that far? But finding a the congress would impeach the president in that regard. I said all along I think this ends up is a political impeachment. So they'll do it in the house. Now, the Democrats control it you need to get sixty seven in the Senate. But I I've always said if he interferes somehow get this guy's like Whitaker or does something to impede this investigation that he'll lose a lot of support in the Senate. He might get to sixty seven votes. What comes of that? Because we'll come back and talk about this in the second the Saudi Arabian thing seems to have started a new flow against Trump in the Senate. And are we headed for that? Are we headed for the possibility of sixty seven votes in the Senate with the precursor that you don't want an impeachment? I don't want an impeachment the right thing to do this clown to step down, which he won't do, but impeachments very very bad for the country on every level. Seven fifty one. What's up at eight Steve lawsuit accusing employees of a braid would highschool failing to prevent the sexual abuse of an incoming freshman during a foot. Ball hazing? We'll have that at eight o'clock from the WGN newsroom. Latch for heavy delays. Traveling three fifty five northbound.

Coming up next