President Trump, Senate Intelligence Committee, Michael Cohen discussed on Anderson Cooper 360

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

So that we get finality whichever way the truth points us, a democratic aide on the Senate Intel committee told CNN that none of the facts are in dispute only what those facts mean is that? That. I mean is that it could come down to do you think one set of facts with two different conclusions? Well, that's possible. I mean, again, consider the word collusion right collusion is actually not illegal term. There's no particular definition of it is it collusion when the president's son. Donald Trump junior invites Russians to Trump Tower in order to give him a dirt on the political opponent. Is it collusion? You know, the con- the conversations that we still don't know much about that Paul Manafort when he was running President Trump's campaign had with Constantine Kalinic. That's individuals who has ties to Russian intelligence again. We know there was all kinds of communication back and forth. We know that almost everybody who had that communication lied about it. So at the end of the day again, I would urge caution here there the factual out people will determine whether whether it rises to the level of collusion when those facts are out, and of course, if we point to things like conspiracy. Then of course, you get into. The legal realm 'bout whether anybody needs to be held accountable for that. But it's it's it's too early to draw those conclusions. Just yet the other question, of course, is whether or not there is any evidence that the president himself or even candidate Trump knew of any of what some might call collusion, if it's Donald Trump junior meeting with the Russians or other things like that. That's a good question. I mean, obviously, if the president knew that these contacts were going on authorize these contacts, if the president said, hey, and I'm I'm not saying I have any evidence that this happened to the president said, hey, yeah. Let's continue these conversation. Russia wants XYZ that gets you pretty close to anybody's definition of collusion. Now, we don't know some big things, right? We don't know, for example, whether the president's son told his father about the meeting that he had with the Russian Steve Bannon, certainly says it's zero percent probability. He didn't. So what did the president say? We may not know that until we know what? Bob Muller was able to get from the president when he got answers to those to those questions. So again, the thing to do right now is to sort of wait till these things are done draw conclusions afterward and just lastly in terms of Michael Cohen, Senator Byrd said today in the wake of Cohen delaying testimony in front of the Senate intelligence committee yet again that any goodwill that may exist. It is now gone at this point. Do you expect Cohen to actually honor his commitment to impure in front of your committee on February? Twenty eighth as scheduled to do. We have had a couple of false starts with that. I do expect him to look at the end of the day. If congress wants you here, you come you. If you don't appear voluntarily in congress thinks it's important. You will be subpoenaed. And who knows some witnesses prefer to be subpoenaed. But my point is particularly around issues of is there, a compromise of the United States government. You know, is there an issue with Russia? What can we learn about how to avoid what happened in the past? It's not voluntary. If you get asked you come if you don't come you, get subpoenaed. So I do that one way or another. We're gonna see Michael Cohen here in the congress, congressman Himes. Thanks very much. Appreciate it. Thank you Anderson. Join sounds someone who can shed more light on just what the lawmakers differ on. And how the information available to the Senate and house intelligence committees may differ from what Robert Muller notion who is a former federal prosecutor join as well as senior adviser four presidents and longtime little sage David Gergen. David, do you think this is going to come down to especially for a committee like the? Senate intelligence committee one set of facts leading to two very different conclusions..

Coming up next