20 Episode results for "Trump Muller"

Washington Post Reporter Greg Miller on Trump, Russia, and the Assault on the Free Press

Kickass News

53:07 min | 2 years ago

Washington Post Reporter Greg Miller on Trump, Russia, and the Assault on the Free Press

"This is kick ass news. I'm Ben Mathis. Support for today's show comes from homecoming directed by the creator of mister robot Sam 's mail, starring Julia Roberts homecoming follows Heidi. Bergman a case worker who helps soldiers transition back to civilian life at the homecoming transitional support center for years later, ideas started a new life, but questions about why she left the homecoming facility force her to reexamine her motives and her past based on the critically acclaimed podcast by ally, Horowitz and Meco Bloomberg. Don't miss the mind bending, psychological thriller homecoming available now only on Amazon prime video. And now enjoy the podcast. Hi, I'm Ben Mathis. Welcome to kick ass news in two thousand eighteen a handful of reporters for the Washington Post were awarded the Pulitzer prize for investigative reporting for their ground breaking stories on Russia's interference in the twenty sixteen election, and the resulting investigations of the Trump campaign and administration the posts national security reporter, Greg Miller broke a number of those stories, including the revelation of General Michael Flynn's previously undisclosed contacts with senior Russian officials and Jared Kushner's attempts to set up a secret back channel with the Russian government. Now, Greg Miller has written a comprehensive and meticulously sourced account of the entire Russia's scandal. In a new book, titled the apprentice, Trump, Russia and the subversion of American democracy. And today he comes on the podcast share how he cornered the Russian ambassador. Sergei Kislyak at a science conference in Washington and caught general Mike. So Flynn in a blatant lie about his dealings with Russian officials. He describes the almost comical level of incompetence surrounding the twenty sixteen DNC attacks gives an inside look at the secret of Russian hacking agencies known as cozy bear and fancy bear. And the infamous troll farm behind Russia's social media influence campaign. He defends the post long standing practice of using anonymous sources and explains just how they go about verifying those stories. Greg reveals efforts by the White House to derail the Washington Post reporting on Trump's Russia connections, and how he learned that President Trump discussed targeting him personally and even putting him in jail for refusing to reveal his sources Plessey discusses what happened to that. Trump Muller meeting that never was. And we speculate on just what it is that Vladimir Putin might have on Donald Trump coming up with Washington Post reporter, Greg Miller in just a moment. Reggie Miller is a national security reporter for the Washington Post who was part of the team that was awarded the twenty fourteen Pulitzer prize for public service for their coverage of American surveillance programs revealed by Edward Snowden and just four years later. He was among the post reporters awarded the Pulitzer prize for investigative reporting for their ground breaking stories on Russia's interference in the twenty sixteen election, and the resulting investigations of the Trump campaign and administration. He delves even deeper into this growing controversy and his new book, titled the apprentice, Trump, Russia and the subversion of American democracy. Greg Miller, welcome to the podcast. Thank you for having me. Well, Greg first off just to establish your credentials on the subject of Trump Russia and the twenty sixteen election, briefly, remind us of some of the stories that you and your team at the Washington Post broke on this subject are sure. So there were a series of them. I think starting. With the the story in December two thousand sixteen that the CIA had secretly concluded that Russia, in fact, was seeking to help elect Donald Trump that will post was the first to report that before the Obama administration had said anything about that. And then fast forward a couple of months when we broke the story that Trump's national security advisor had lied about his conversations of after the election before the inauguration with Russia's ambassador to the United States. He had spoken with the Russian ambassador told Russia after Obama imposed sanctions to punish Russia for its airfare since Mike Flynn had told the Russian ambassador. Sit tight we got you covered. Couple of weeks will be an empowered. And we're gonna reexamine all this. And then he lied about that too the vice president he lied about that to Sean Spicer, the White House spokesman at the time. He lied about it too. The public, and we broke the story that he had not told the truth and that led to his firing within days, and then it sort of continued from there we had stories that forced Jeff Sessions to recuse himself from the Russian mestigation because he too had not been truthful about his contacts with Russians I had stories that I broke a story a month or two later that when Trump invited the Russian Foreign Minister in the Oval Office. He had disclosed highly classified information to his Russian visitors, and and then to big big project stories that year about Russia's interference and Obama's struggle to deal with it in real time and Trump's refusal later to admit that it was real. Yeah. And also, I think you say that you were involved in the story of Kushner's meeting with Kislyak the Russian ambassador ride. Yes. So the post. Yes, my colleagues, and I. Had had stories about Jared Kushner's strange interactions with the Russian ambassador where he actually proposes using Russian communication systems to set up a kind of secret back channel to the Kremlin. And there were there were a lot of others to I think you said Sergei Kislyak actually had to kinda calm him down. He he was a little bit more cautious than Kushner was right? Absolutely. Some of Trump's members of Trump's team were so eager in these sort of offline communications that even the Russians were a little freaked out. In another of these meetings with Kislyak, I guess he was joined by the sky Sergei Gorkov who is the head of the Russian economic development Bank. Now, I'm trying to imagine what possible official purpose his presence in a meeting with Jared Kushner would have been and, you know, those they're the accounts the explanations for that meeting from the Trump team in the White House was completely at odds with Russia's. They explanation for what that meeting was. They were not even close to being on the same page when we were asking about what the hell was this meeting about interesting? What were what were the two versions? One version was that. This was just, you know, the Kushner version was this was just meeting with them out of courtesy basically to said nothing to do with his sort of business. His desperate dire situation with his real estate where he needed a big infusion of cash because he was under water on a building in New York. And of course, the the Russian version was. Oh, yes. It was absolutely about impossible investment opportunities with the Kushner company. I mean, they you couldn't make this up. Now. I mean in fairness, it's not illegal for a private citizen to meet with a foreign diplomat. Congressman do that all the time and average citizens meet with diplomats from other countries. What is it that you find most suspicious about that interaction? You know, you're right to a degree. And and that's always been one of the puzzling things about this like, so they had all of these interactions, and maybe they were unwise, maybe it wasn't smart to have these conversations and interactions. But the way we learned about them was always sort of suspicion raising. Right. They they never came clean about any of it. They never just sort of came forward and said, yes, we had this conversation. Yes. We set up this meeting. That's what this, you know. It was always the post or the New York Times finding out about it forcing. Them to explain him than they would lie or mislead about it. And then they have to come clean, which is par for the course for this administration. I mean that seems to be just how they operate. It does seem to be an impulse to that that sort of truth is not their first recourse. Now as part of your investigation into Michael Flynn's ties to Russia, you actually confronted Kislyak at I think, it was a science conference would is he like, he's, you know, interesting. He's a super affable guy. I mean, he was highly effective as Russia's ambassador to the United States because he was always running around town shaken hands in meeting people collecting phone numbers and contacts of Americans, and yeah, so we were you know, really trying to figure out we knew that Flynn had had this conversation with Kislyak. We had a suspicion that he wasn't being forthcoming about it. It was very hard to to get at the truth to that story. So almost out of desperation at one point. I saw that Kislyak who's a trained physicist that by by background was speaking at a conference of physicists in Washington at a hotel. So I showed up I made my way to the front row and watched him speak and was basically. Thinking that maybe I'll be able to chase him afterward through the exits and see if I can get him to say anything, and I was stunned that he finished speaking came back down and completely by accident sat down right next to me. And he so he was trapped because there was another speaker comet the spotlight was still on the stage. He can't get up and leave. So I kind of had him cornered for about forty nine minutes. And he verified the interactions between himself and Flint's Laurie. In fact, he told me that yes, he'd known Flynn for several years had they had extensive conversations and texts back and forth throughout the campaign. And in the interim period before Trump was sworn in. And it was you know, he didn't he wouldn't tell me that they had discussed sanctions. So that required further reporting, but I came away from that little encounter with you know, him on the record acknowledging extent extensive interaction with kiss with the Michael Flynn. Yeah. Every time I see Kislyak. I think to myself he is straight out of central casting for old school. Soviet apparatchik or KGB? Yeah. Like, he could be in like, you know, rocky four or something. Exactly. Now, eventually ran with that story about his interactions with Michael Flynn, and another kind of lucky happened stances that you had a one of your colleagues from Washington Post was actually meeting with Flynn. I think that day and was able to confront him about it before you ran the story. That's right. Karen young who's a terrific reporter, one of the MO veteran sort of diplomat diplomatic correspondence for the post had a meeting scheduled with Flynn in his office, his new office in the west wing of the White House. Just as we were finishing up that story, we asked her when you get in there get through your interview than when you're done wait till the end ask him, again, tell him the post has has a bunch of sources telling us that he's not telling the truth, and we're giving him one more chance to come clean here. And she does he again says no, no, no, that's not true. And you know, the the the end that story is so bizarre. Because the next day we held the story that night. We were a little worried that he was still clinging to this denial. We wanted to make sure everything was ok before we published. It's a big deal when you're accusing the national security adviser of lying to the public next day. Get a call from the White House. We tell them we're gonna go ahead with our story. Anyway, we know Flynn's denying it. But we're confident our sources and he says well hold on. We might want to modify the statement that Flynn gave you we. We know he now can't quite be clear. He can't recall, whether he actually discussed sanctions, it might have come up, and it that was, you know, their whole story, crumbled, right then, and there Yelm, along the way is like the White House engaged in all kinds of efforts to either derail these stories, or perhaps even intimidate you. And your colleagues at the post is that right? Well, things did they resort to. Absolutely there were. There were strange and and disturbing moments. There were later on and other stories became increasingly combative and tense our interactions with the White House on these stories, and there was a moment where I was sitting in my editor's office on a conference call with White House officials were screaming at us through the phone LES. You can't publish this stuff. We're going to track down your sources you need to get off this call right now. One of them said and go call all your sources back to make sure you get this. Great. You're not right. And in that moment, I just felt like he's trying to make us call sources. So that they so the we light up those sources phone so that they can figure out who they are interesting. So you think that they were actually surveilling you. I don't know that we never saw any evidence that they were surveilling us, although we actually had meetings in the post newsroom where we were warned. And where we were spoke with security experts about taking precautions including like being careful about what we put out in our trash at night because there were possibly investigators digging into us to kind of discredit us. You know, the so I never saw director evidence that we were under surveillance. But there were there was intense investigative interests in who our sources were. And there still is. And it was yeah. Indeed, James Komi, actually references you in one of his memos describing a meeting that he had with Trump where the president talked about actually putting you in jail for a story that he didn't like how chilling was that for you. That was really unnerving when I saw that, you know, we those the Justice department ultimately release these memos that Komi had written about each of his encounters with the president. He took notes on these things because he was kind. Troubled by by the the nature of their conversations and in one of them, they are in the Oval Office and Trump is telling him, look, the problem is not Mike Flynn. It's the leaks. You gotta get to the bottom of these leaks and combs going along with it, Colmey, San. Yeah. I know this is a big issue surprising. And then Trump says, you know, we need to go back to putting reporters in jail we used to do that we should get back to that. And then he's talking specifically about certain stories, and as I read that memo, he was talking about stories that I had written about his conversations with foreign leaders because I had sources knee about his calls with the leaders of Mexico and Australia. And I remember those articles I even ended up with transcripts of those calls, and we publish them. And he was limited. And you know, Komi says that in a couple of points in that meeting you'd be great to nail somebody to the wall. As an as an example would be great to put some heads on pikes. And you know, that was really. That really was frightening. Yeah. Were you upset at Colmey for playing along with the president did not standing up for the free press or sort of understand the position? He was in that case. No, he, you know for all of his. Ver- all of the way, he sort of now depicts himself as somebody who was valiantly standing up to Trump. He also when you read these memos, and if you read that my book, the apprentice, I think our I talked to lots of people who worked with Komi he was trying to find a way to hang onto his job. He was trying to find a way to get along with Trump. They didn't agree on many things, but he didn't wanna be pushed out of that job. Now, he was trying to find common ground, and unfortunately, putting reporters in jail seems like one of those areas where he felt there might be some common ground while now many of these stories surrounding Trump and his team's interaction with Russians wouldn't have come to light. Were it not for the willingness of people within the administration to talk to the Washington Post and other outlets on background the alt- ride and conservative media seemed to be engaging in a campaign to discredit journalists and articles they don't like by getting the public to somehow conflict anonymous sources with either unverified sources. Or perhaps even made up. Sources. Can you clarify what an anonymous source is? And how the post actually vets these anonymous sources sure think that it's confusing for a lot of people that US this question anonymous sources, it might not be the best term for them because they're not anonymous to us as journalists we we know exactly who they are. We don't use their names in stories because there would be repercussions for them. If they were if their identities were revealed, but we absolutely know who they are. And we never rely on sources that are anonymous to us. And in fact, what often happens even when we somebody comes to us, which is also something I've written about in the bookcases were there were officials in government who were deeply disturbed by what they were seeing come to reporters at the post, including myself eager to express, you know, describe what they've witnessed you end up still having to do a lot of vetting of. Those people who are they where they coming from do they have ax the access to the information? They claim to have you go back to many other sources that you've known for many years, and you sort of ask them without revealing who source a is listen, I'm getting this sort of information to sound plausible to you to sound. Okay. There's a, you know, I would just say that we couldn't write these stories, and we wouldn't know of half as much as we do now about the Trump administration's entanglements with Russia. If we couldn't rely on anonymous sources, they're critical to our functioning as a news organization, and we and we prize above all else. Accuracy and facts. So. Yeah. So so these aren't just anonymous people calling you up on your name, in fact, in one case, they were you follow say, there's an example of this in the book because when my colleagues L. Nakashima terrific reporter at one point went down to the mail room at the post, and in her mailbox is a anonymous letter during the during the tail end of the election after the election. It's an anonymous letter from somebody purporting to be an insider at the Trump transition team up in Trump Tower, deeply troubled by what he or she is seeing happening there in terms of interactions with Russia. It ends up being kind of a roadmap for us at helps point us to stories including stories about Flynn. But we never relied on anything in that document because we never figured out who had written it even to this day. We don't know. And so that's not a source to us. We can't use those unverified. Anonymous tips that come in except to use them as sort of reporting guide for where we can focus our attention. Yeah. I mean, your Washington Post biggest story Watergate probably wouldn't have happened. If it weren't for an anonymous source deep throat was an anonymous. Source. It's funny that you know, this has been going on for decades, it's been standard practice for journalists. And now, suddenly it's being treated as if it's something new and suspicious, right, right? And Trump goes after it constantly they're fake sources, even as he often inadvertently confirms the contents of the stories, you know, in a tweet or something we're gonna take a quick break. And then we'll be back with more with the Washington Post's. Greg Miller when we come back in just a minute. Almost every day. We hear something on the news about a cyber attack. Sometimes it's just a bunch of pranksters, but more often it's a foreign country with vast cyber resources trying to hack our power grid, our banking system or military's information networks, the national security agency plays a big part in protecting our country from cyber attacks, and you can help the NSA is hiring technical professionals to serve on the front. Lines of information security, if you work in computer, science networking programming or electrical engineering, you can help keep your country safe design, new hardware, systems and networks, right faster smarter programs. Protect America's critical infrastructure or help uncover what our adversaries are planning to do next. Learn more about careers at the national security agency today, visit intelligence careers dot gov slash NSA. That's intelligence careers dot gov slash NSA in a world filled with fake news, flatter Thor's and conspiracy theorists. What's a thinking person? Like you supposed to do on? The current episode of star talk stars neuroscientist and host Heather Berlin PHD and her comic co host our Chevallier investigate. The importance of skepticism in the power of evidence based thinking to help us separate fact from fiction, Heather an Ari or joined in studio by guests CARA. Santa Maria in Dr Steven novella, two of the host of the popular weekly science podcast the skeptics guide to the universe. If you're worried about the growing tide of anti intellectualism, and the devaluation of experts and facts, which were seeing all around us. Tune in for a show filled with science and skepticism remember trust. No one question authority and listened to star talk all stars to get the rigorous scientific thinking you're desperate to hear that star. Talk all stars. Listen now wherever you get podcasts and make sure to subscribe in the next sixty seconds. You're going to learn how the flat iron school can change your life. The flat iron school will teach you everything you need to get a job in code data science or design, but also prepare you for the jobs that don't even exist yet because this is a school designed to educate you in the art of change. So if you're feeling stuck board or unfulfilled flatiron will teach you how to change things. You'll learn by making things breaking things in discovering. How the future is being built the results speak for themselves. Go to flat iron school dot com slash podcasts to read about graduates, new careers and salary ranges and explore upcoming courses as well as exciting new careers. You can start building your own new career and coding data science or digital design at one of flat iron schools, we work campuses or take courses online. Go to flat iron school dot com slash podcast. East and read about graduates new careers, salary ranges upcoming courses and explored these exciting. New careers enrollment is now open it's time to future proof your career and change things starting with you flat iron school dot com slash podcast. And now back to the podcast. Now, one of these situations where Trump kind of went off the rails was that infamous tweet about Obama supposedly wiretapping him you guys investigated that. And you actually reveal how the White House apparently went into overtime trying to prove these wild assertions by the president. I it sounds like they were trying to reverse engineer this to somehow come up with something anything that would back up his conspiracy way to put it actually. Right. I mean, he makes his crazy allegation. There's no evidence for it. Let's back it out. Let's sort of figure out how what can we come? How can we come closest to making? It seem like there's something plausible there. And. Yeah. So when are we wrote about that at the time, but for the book, I really went back and interviewed additional sources, and that ends up being one of the more kind of painstaking reconstructions in the book his blow by blow account of how they took. Doc classified material inside the White House combed through it for stuff that they thought they could use against the Obama administration then enlist Devon Nunez, this House Republican from California who's a close Trump ally. In congress bring him over to the White House bring him into the secret room and show him this stuff, and then have him kind of trotted out as if he's discovered it on his own through some amazing bit of detective work was bizarre. That was like the gang who couldn't shoot straight there. It happened. So many times over and over many cases like it. And what's funny to me is I don't know if you've heard this from people in Washington, but even from conservatives, I know who know him and interact with Devon Nunez in congress. There seems to be consensus that he's probably not the brightest bulb on the hill. No, I know. In fact, I'm have this line in the book where the former chairman of the house intelligence committee. Mike, roy. Jurors who was a serious guy was right was a former FBI agent highly regarded with so. Frustrated with Nunez when he joins the committee because Nunez would use the traveled money and go off to these places, but never come in and read any documents never do any homework. Rogers, actually, cut off his travel budget refused to let him access any money until he went came in and would sit down and look at documents and actually put his signature to them. This whole Obama wiretapping hoax. I was probably the first attack in this ongoing assault on the intelligence community by Trump. It got so bad that by the time. He was inaugurated he had to sort of make this halfhearted attempt to win them back with the speech at CIA headquarters. I think a day or two after the inauguration. How was that speech received at Langley as so not? Well, I mean is the short answer. You're right. It was his second day in office his handlers, including Ryan's previous put this on the schedule thinking, this is this would be a good time the election's over. You're now the boss you are. Now, the president you're now overseeing all of these agencies. They work for you. Now, let's have some fence mending. Let's get this off to a good start put that on the president's calendar. And he goes out to the CIA in a second day in office in everybody's sort of wondering how is this going to go because just weeks earlier he had called CIA Nazis? You know, use them of. Leaking the Steele dossier about him and. The interesting thing that happened. There was that they put they chose us very special backdrop for his visit for his remarks there. Right. The the wall with the star what they call that. But memorial the agency. So there's when you enter the CIA headquarters you walk through the lobby on the right hand side as this big wall with a with a bunch of hand, carved starves, there's roughly one hundred and forty one hundred fifty of them they all correspond to some an agency employee killed in the line of duty. And so this is a pretty sacred spot in that in that building and on campus. Right. Thank. So these are these are friends colleagues who are now gone. And so they put the stage there, it is an impressive and dramatic backdrop and other presidents have used it. But no president has ever used it the way Trump did he gets up gives this self aggrandizing speech when one person called to me in a narcissistic diatribe. I mean, he's up. There makes barely any reference to those stars or the sacrifices of the agency or it's critical work and national security and instead goes on extended riff about that. How large the crowds were during his campaign. How many time magazine covers he's been on? How many evil press refusing to acknowledge that he had over a million and a half people at his inauguration, which wasn't even close to being true. He just goes through all of this and people's jaws or sort of dropping like you. You wanna do this on your own time at at the rallies. Use staging, you know in Ohio fine. But you you can't do that here. And you know, one of the the the more precious details that I got for this book was from some sources who told me that after Trump left and after the agency came back to work that Monday, some employees began bringing flowers and laying flowers at the base of that memorial wall. They had felt he had defiled it so much that they that they felt they had to sort of Mark that and and more and that is usually what they do in honor of a fallen hero in an honor of one of those stars on the wall. Ordinarily, you would only see flowers thereafter, a new car new star has been carved. Wow. Now, there's been constant speculation and debate over whether or not Trump will actually submit to an interview with the Muller investigation. You say they actually scheduled a meeting for last January at Camp, David. What was the purpose of that meeting? Was that supposed to be the? The interview that was going to be the interview, and they were going to get it over with. I mean, there were sort of really competing pressures impulses on Trump's legal team at the time. They and the president wanted to get this over with. And they, you know, so part of it was if we just give him in this interview, he'll have to wrap things up, you know, which makes sense if you have nothing to hide get it over with get it over with put it out. There will be we'll get this behind us and move on. And then they did they set a date January twenty seventh at Camp, David. They started even making some logistical preparations for it. But then less than a week to go. John dowd. Trump's lawyer really panics, I think he just sort of, you know, people are on cable television shows at the time saying, oh my God. You can never put Trump in front of any prosecutor because he's gonna just perjure himself within ten seconds. He's realizing that he can't prep. Trump. Trump doesn't do homework. He won't listen, he won't sit down and practice lines. He won't stay to a script that this is a this has the potential for disaster. And he pulls the plug on it at the last minute was this after that supposed ri- run that they did? Of practice interview with him where he just made stuff up and pulled stuff out of his butt. Yeah. I mean, this is clearly after Dowd and others try to interact with him and test his ability to perform under these circumstances. And they come away just feeling like there's no way this will work. Well, I want to ask you about the Russian interference itself in the election. You describe the DNC's astonishingly glacial reaction to the news that they might have been hacked as sort of a comedy of errors. What took him so long to take that seriously? There's so many there's so many moments in the story in the book were you I feel like it's like a horror movie where you're just sort of watching the lead. Character stumble into a terrible situation where the killers just writer and the you're screaming at the screen wakeup. I mean, this is just one of them where you know, the DNC is. Stuff. Weird stuff is happening in their network. The FBI calls to try and the FBI learns about this penetration. Pretty much knows from the outset that this is a Russian hacking organization targeting the DNC, they're a little constrained in what they can say at least not early stage. But they're calling over guys. We got a problem. They call the front desk at GNC and get past where else to the help line the test like they didn't even know who to reach out to now, it's just a mazing so weeks and months go by with Russians rummaging around inside the DNC network before the DNC security team and executive team wakes up. I mean for a long time they think that these FBI calls are a hoax. This is not really not really the FBI on the line. And and it it's it's only way after its way. Way too late that they wake up to what's going on. Wow. Now the same time. There was also this massive Russian disinformation campaign on social media. I've heard all writers say that the Russians only spent maybe a few thousand dollars on these Facebook campaigns. And so how much influence could they possibly have? Can you set the record straight on that? How much reached did the Russian Facebook campaign actually have? Yeah. So that's really misleading number. It's true. That isn't cost that much, and they were weirdly paying in rubles for some of these ads, which you wonder why Facebook didn't understand what was happening. But the the outlay for the ads themselves is not in any way indicative of the scale of this effort because Meanwhile, Russia's plowing millions into employing hundreds of people at a troll farm in Saint Petersburg, sending operatives to the United States to travel back and forth. Criss crossed the country taking the measure of political the political mood. Various places, really, yes. And then just pumping massive volumes of disinformation at us through Facebook, Twitter and other platforms and the numbers are staggering. Now. I mean, we didn't Facebook was very dismissive of this at the time Mark Zuckerberg was but now they have done some digging. And they recently acknowledged that more than one hundred and ten million Facebook users in the United States were subjected to Russian propaganda during the two thousand sixteen race. I mean, this is an election that comes down to fewer than eighty thousand votes. So the math is overwhelming. And it's and it's just you have to understand Facebook were so you maybe they only spend a couple thousand dollars buying those ads, but that's not what propels that content across the country. It's. Yeah. It's right. It's awesome. It's we Americans are susceptibility to this fake onslaught passing it around re tweeting it reposting it liking it. I mean as much as Russia's to to to blame for this. We we have to take a hard look at ourselves. Now, you investigated some of these Russian troll farms who exactly are these people? How are they trained? How does that operates fascinating? So I have a I don't speak Russian my. But I have terrific colleague in Moscow who helped me with this. His name is Anton trion off ski. He works for the Washington Post is we still alive. Oh, yeah. He's he's a great guy. He actually scored interviews with some of the employee's at this troll farm work. It's called the internet research agency. And what they describe these are Russians who even Russians described this as an operation straight out of George Orwell. They would go there. They would take these jobs. This thing is called the internet research agency, it looks and sounds kind of like a tech startup or something. But there's no clients. There's no source of any revenue that anybody can figure out they ask people there to watch Netflix shows like house of cards, so that they can get more fluent in the American vernacular, and then KARN create a bunch of phony American kind of sounding identities and incredible and just spend their day after day after day pumping phony content out directly at us. So was this actually a Russian agency? Or was it a third party? It's an independent intimate, but it's super tied into Putin. Okay. So the so the organization is funded and run by this guy who just sort of known as Putin's chef he's he's called Putin's chef because he meets Putin after he opens a restaurant a floating restaurant in Saint Petersburg and. Likes it brings foreign dignitaries, including George Bush to this restaurant forms this attachment to this entrepreneur, and then proceeds to make him a Russian oligarch by giving all kinds of massive Russian contracts for him. But this is the price of that. This is how Russia works, right? This is the price of that kind of patronage you're now now, I need something from you set this thing up over in Saint Petersburg, and let's see what we can do against the Americans. Now, tell us a little about these two agencies that are nicknamed cozy bear and fancy bear. What are they do? They do they work in concert or did they have different tasks there? There are hacking into entities of that are within Russian intelligence agencies. One of them is the GRU, which is the Russian military service. And the other is the FSP which is its foreign intelligence gathering entity. You know, and it was kind of murky. For a long time who they were were they kind of outsourced by Russia. But oh my God. Robert Muller has told us so much in his indictments about these entities down to you know, specific names of individual Russian operatives the keyboards almost where they were sitting as they engaged in this hacking activity, targeting the DNC and other American networks. So they are there in Moscow. They are they are entities within the Russian intelligence apparatus controlled by the Kremlin whose entire mission is to engage in hacking activities against an against Putin's enemies. Do they perform different roles or they both kind of working on the same thing sanitize. That's a great question. Because it, you know, I write about in the book how the DNC came under really two separate attacks. There was a there was an initial quieter kind of more sophisticated attack by the FSP it gets it penetrate. Hates the network, and is really doesn't make a lot of noise. It's tiptoeing around in their pulling files down without attracting a lot of attention a year later, the GRU shows up, and it's like, you know, clanging pots and pans as it just sort of bangs around inside. They're just rippling grabbing stuff, and you're yanking it out of out of storage areas and making big mass files. So big that it's trying to download that it chokes off the system and it forces the whole network to shut down. I mean, they're just so Columbia, but they're they're working kind of a in competition with one another toward the same end. It's a thing that happened Russians yet because I've heard that there's the the group that is focused on just getting information on getting emails that can be damaging the they can release later through Gucci for whoever WikiLeaks, and then there's the arm that is either focused on actual sabotage or just under. Reminding the entire system by being so loud in making so much noise when they're hacking an institution like the DNC that it undermines our faith in the whole system. Yeah. Yeah. I think that we're we're living through now is a weird extraordinarily sort of aggressive new era in espionage with Russia at sort of at the forefront. And it's in its broader than just this this hacking stuff that we're talking about. They attempted assassinations of the scruples in south bury England is former Russian intelligence officer and his daughter found unconscious on a park bench. Having been exposed to a Soviet-developed toxin. I mean, they're almost trolling us in terms of how horrible their tradecraft is. I mean, they're almost like barely barely even trying to disguise the Russian hand in these operations. It's almost like daring us to stop it. Yeah. And that's one of the craziest things because if you had a president who treated this as a real problem and not a hoax. You would react you. You would see a very different reaction. I think from Russia. Let me ask you this. What are the aspects of Russia's involvement in the election and Trump's relationship with Putin that you personally, just find most baffling? I I find Trump sort of the psychology of Trump is so baffling to me because it seems so illogical in some levels. I you know, when the when the one of the last chapters of the book is about his summit with Putin in Helsinki, I travelled to Helsinki to be in the room for that press conference. There's a moment there where Trump can really transform his presidency. Right. He the first question that comes at him in that press conferences, Mr President. Can you turn to bladder Putin right now, tell him that the hack, you know, that your intelligence services tell you that they Russia did hack the election in that? You're not going to allow that to happen again. If Trump could bring himself to do that. Can you imagine how we would look at him differently as president, right? We would we would he he would sort of the delay Shen that he so seemed desperately craves. He might actually earn it if he were to do that. Right. Exactly. He might actually get it. But he can't bring himself to do it. Because to do that requires acknowledging that the interference was real which requires then for him to acknowledge that maybe he had if some illegal help a big boost from Russia in the election, and it wasn't just his magnificence that propelled him to victory, and it's asking too much of him. And what's weird is if in fact, Putin had something on him or Trump had some motivation to be acquiescent, Vladimir Putin? You would usually think that that would be behind closed doors, and he would at least in in Putin would probably understand he was going to put on a public face of resisting Putin and standing up for America against Russia. But he doesn't even. In in public. He just seems to fold like a cheap suit. That's correct. So if Putin were controlling Trump, he would probably tell him President Trump, you're going to have to act really tough toward us and then behind the scenes cut us some deals right act. Like, you are are are coming after us in public. You can say all you want about me and press conferences and say what a terrible person, I am the hind the scenes can you lift some of these sanctions and Trump might actually have the sort of political room to do some of that if he could talk tough if he could even sort of pretend to be tough toward Putin. So then does that undermine the Trump Russia suspicions? I think that it undermines the the kind of idea that there is a complex highly orchestrated tightly orchestrated conspiracy here. Okay. I knew it was not convinced that Trump could. Execute such a conspiracy. Yeah. But but that's not to say that I think that. The collusion claims are ridiculous because I think that they're real. And I think that there was so much collusion out in the open and behind the scenes leading to things like we talked about at the beginning of this podcast the effort by Mike Flynn to make good on some of these requests that Russia ahead. Get rid of these sanctions for us. I mean, there's a lawyer. Yeah. I I don't want to confuse correlation with causation. But even I have to admit the just the mere timing of so many of these things seems way too perfect possibly be Winstons. Yeah. I think so too. I mean, I I also think that. That this is it's hard for us to process because so much of it has happened out in the open, and then it's kind of an interesting mental exercise to think of these these interactions between Trump and Putin in a different way like his infamous lined or in the election Russia, if you're listening. I hope you find those emails those missing Hillary Clinton emails. We now know from Robert Muller Russia. In fact, was listening within hours they launch a spear phishing campaign hacking campaign against Clinton Email servers trying to get at that stuff didn't work. But I mean, Trump is in that moment saying so in front of the world, if we had learned, you know, months later that there was a Russian attempt to get it Hillary's missing emails, and that it followed by hours a secret communication from Trump to the Kremlin. I mean that would be one of the biggest scandals in American history since it's out in the open and staring at us in the face. It's hard to know what to make of it. Well, the million dollar question is what the heck does Putin have on Donald Trump some people's suspect that it's a sex tape or might be financial. Would you bet on it being something like that? Or maybe the compromise that he has Donald Trump is simply the fact that Putin helped him win the election. And maybe even that Trump might have known about it yet something it's something really tried to. Explore and tease out in the book. And I would put these sort of in a couple of areas of were that I would assign various levels of kind of credibility or emphasis, the idea of it's certainly possible given how Trump conducts himself that there's a pair of him with prostitutes. And I mean, I have to say, right. Why would he carry himself any differently in the Ritz Carlton in Moscow? Then he does at a Lake Tahoe golf course. Me daniels. Everything that's come out doesn't exactly discredit that idea. No. But but would that really something like that with that really give Putin definitive leverage over Trump, not not based on how he's been able to sort of shrug off all of these scandals. All good point. I think that the idea that there are hidden financial entanglements is a much more compelling one. I think we could learn a lot about that from Muller. You we've seen him terror. Paul Manafort, Rick gates limb from limb by going through their financials, and I mean Trump's whole financial empire has so many. We. Weird entanglements with borderline criminal entities and fraud. You know, people convicted of fraud, and and really scary overseas person personas and stuff, it's. He also goes to such enor- great lengths to hide all that from the public fusing to put out his tax returns that everything about that tells you that there's something there. And but I also think that there's also a fairly simple explanation against during us right in the face, which is that Trump just personally hit in his DNA. He admires people like Putin that he thinks that that's that's weirdly to him an example of a strong leader he tries to emulate Putin. I I actually think that if you gave Trump the choice right now enough power to make a decision on whether he could kind of replicate Putin's arrangement here for himself. You know, meaning he wouldn't have to worry about a Muller investigation or an antagonistic Justice department or an antagonistic press corps or or recalcitant con Republicans in congress. He would take that in a second. You know? Yeah. Before we go, I one. To ask you more about that. Because as a member of the free press in just as an American do you worry about what Donald Trump might do if he's backed into a corner on this? I worry about a lot of things. I mean, I worry that the signal that Trump sends over and over again about the dist, you know, just the assault the daily attack on the very principles of that that guide what I try to do and what so many professional journalists in this country, tried to our our devotion to truth, and fact, and fairness I mean in and he just sort of attacks that endlessly and devalue it, and then and degrades it his incitements we saw again, an example just this week of him praising a re a Republican candidate who had beaten a reporter. Yeah. And Trump thinks that's was convicted of assault who've seen him really dismissed being very dismissive about one of my colleagues at the post. This this Saudi citizen who started writing columns for us killed dismembered in. A Saudi consulate in Turkey. Trump tweets that like it's just not his problem. Not our issue. Nothing. Nothing. Should no reason. To disrupt our relationships, we Audis all of those things are deeply disturbing to me will again, Greg. Miller's book is called the apprentice, Trump, Russia and the subversion of American democracy. Greg. Thanks so much for talking with me. My pleasure. Thank you. Thanks again to Greg Miller for coming on the podcast order. His new book, the apprentice, Trump, Russia and the subversion of American democracy on Amazon audible or wherever books are sold. You can regularly read Greg's reporting in the Washington Post and follow him on Twitter at at Greg b Miller. The flat iron school will teach you everything you need to get a job in code data science or design, but the law also prepare you for the jobs that don't even exist you go to flat iron school dot com slash podcast and read about graduates new careers, salary ranges upcoming courses and explore these exciting new careers. You can start building your own career and coding data science or digital design at one of flat irons. Local we work campuses where you can take courses online. Go to flat iron school dot com slash podcast. Read the reviews and sign up for. Three. Intro course enrollment is open. Now, if you haven't already be sure to subscribe to kick ass news on itunes and leave us a review you can follow us on Facebook or on Twitter at at kick-ass news pod. And as always, I welcome your comments questions and ideas at comments at kick ass, news dot com. I'm Ben Mathis. And thanks for listening to kick ass news. Kick ass. News is a trademark of Mathis entertainment Inc.

President Trump Trump Russia Washington Post Vladimir Putin Mike Flynn reporter president Trump Muller White House Trump Russia General Michael Flynn DNC Reggie Miller Trump Tower Trump administration Washington flat iron school United States Sergei Kislyak
Do voters perceive lack of urgency in Pelosi's approach to Trump?

AM Joy

1:24:32 hr | 2 years ago

Do voters perceive lack of urgency in Pelosi's approach to Trump?

"Yeah. Good morning and welcome to AM joy. Well, welcome to America's new normal. We're twelve innocent people in Virginia Beach paid with their lives just for living in a country. We're buying guns is easier than renting apartment. And we're one hundred fifty one days into twenty nineteen America, experienced its one hundred fiftieth mass shooting of the year. That's almost one a day. Also, a part of America's bleak new normal these disturbing pictures that we I saw last night of dozens of migrant adults piled on top of each other literally, at a dangerously overcrowded detention center in Paso, Texas, in a space design, for far fewer humans also overnight, what has become another new normal under the Trump administration. The Justice department has blown right past ignoring congressional subpoenas and is now refusing a court order to release the transcripts of conversations. Between former national security adviser Michael Flynn, and the Russian ambassador in December twenty sixteen. So welcome to that. But despite this constitution bending new thing that is almost become routine, where the Trump administration simply choose which laws and congressional and court orders, it feels like complying with backed by the attorney general version of ROY Cohn. What is also become a kind of new normal is at the leadership of the opposition party is weirdly, calm in plainly openly, extremely reluctant to use impeachment as a sanction against this president. You, you don't bring an indictment where you don't bring impeachment. Unless you have all the facts, the strongest possible case, so that the president just held accountable one way or another in the court of public opinion on the court of law, or in the congress of the United States. You don't bring an impeachment unless you have all the facts. Okay. So what actual facts, have we got about Trump trampling the constitution and running roughshod over congress, and even committing potential crimes? Like obstruction of Justice, anything do have anything. Oh, you're right. We have this report the mullahs report right here, right here there. It is. This is report that everyone was waiting for that was supposed to deliver the Khuda gras to the Trump administration or the Trump presidency and restore democracy. We have we have this. And speaking of Robert Mueller he came out this week and told y'all in no uncertain terms that he has done all the work he's going to do. He is going home and also read the damn report and figure it out. If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime. We would have said, so it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of crime, when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge. Now I hope and expect this to be the only time that I will speak to you in this manner. So already you congress. Yes or maybe. No. And now here comes the tough love portion of the AM joy show, Robert Muller as respected figure as he is. And we'll go down in history as being is not going to save. Donald Trump Muller has gone, even if he ultimately testified before congress. There is no cavalry that's waiting to descend from beyond the wall to take down the night. King. There are no ELS in wizards coming to destroy the orcs and helped Frodo drop the ring into mount. Do just to mix my vaguely Elizabethan era fantasy TV and movie metaphors, and as for congress. The democratic leadership has made it clear that really no matter how far Donald Trump pushes and stretches the limits of the constitution. No matter how many times he tells us administration to basically flush their subpoenas down the nearest Whitehouse. Lou or defies court orders, and even with Republican just in a March providing bipartisan cover. Congress is not going to take down Donald Trump. At least not using the remedy the constitution disappinted for an out of control. President impeachment speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested prayer to deal with Donald Trump. She suggested from Alana your Trump and the family to stage an intervention, and she and other members of house leadership has made it clear that they fundamentally believe that it should be your job. The voters in twenty twenty to sanction this president by denying him a second term the democratic leadership, openly view impeachment as a waste of time, unless there's guaranteed removal by the Senate, something that has never happened in American history. So that's where we are democrat, despite the growing clamour among their base to at least begin peach inquiry are plowing ahead with their strategy, which is to conduct a series of hearings at various committees, issuing. Strongly worded letters, which wants to five will be followed by subpoenas, which wants rejected will result in eventual court cases, which wants adjudicated and appealed will eventually result in something that changes public opinion about Donald Trump. And then if that public opinion becomes a popular groundswell from peach mint, then it will happen. Maybe so no one is coming to save you. But the reality is that Donald Trump also has a say, in all of this, and if he continues crashing through the constitution like a bull in China, shop defying congress and now even defying the courts what are Democrats going to do? Joining me now is house, which already whip James Clyburn, and congressman Clyburn. Thank you so much for joining me this morning. Thank you very much for heaven. Thank you. So I'm looking here at a letter from congressman Adam Schiff, who is the chairman of the house intelligence committee writing to Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence about this order from attorney general William bar to comply with this investigation of the investigators. So Donald Trump's attorney general Donald Trump's White House. They're plowing forward with investigating main even members of the FBI. They've now defied a court order to turn over the correspondences between Michael Flynn of the Russian ambassador. They're just literally defying both you guys and the courts. So if impeachment is not the answer to that. And I think it's pretty clear that you guys leadership. Don't think impeachment is the answer. What is the answer? Impeach me. Maybe there answer. I don't think that those of us in leadership are saying that impeachment is not the answer. I think from the report from all of that I've seen and heard for the last several years, I do believe that impeachment. Maybe the answer those are the grounds. Now, the question then becomes what is the proper time for us to start this process? And I think that's the leader speaker Pelosi is saying that this point we must take cheer that we do not get out in front of this process. Let's continue to do what we're doing. Let's continue to do the investigations this have the hearings, this Bill, the public support. Let's do what is necessary to bring the public along. And then we may reach the time to launch the. The impeachment inquiries. I don't think we there yet. Well, probably clearly the public agrees with at least according to opinion polls. Right so that you have a plurality of voters who do support immediately beginning impeachment. At least inquiry against this president thirty seven percent and this poll, I will say, I think impeachment and removal, which is you don't need to combine those really and forty percent favor. No action. So it's kind of close. But do you are you concerned sir that just having lots and lots of hearings, they kind of drone on and on and on the kind of become almost sort of a miasma become sort of din that there's this hearing over here? There's this hearing over there. There's not a coherent narrative that the public can follow that essentially public will eventually tune out all these many different disparate hearings tune, it all out, and then essentially, Donald Trump will win by default and just get away with it all. Well, that is a fair that I have, but I also have a bit of experience over the years do recall that we had in the peach mint. Against President Clinton. It was a very partisan process to literal, though. It may be and look what happened when it came to Richard Nixon, several years ago, we'd never had to get to impeachment because he stonewalled he fired people, he did things on the same order. The Trump is doing for the finally caught up with him. Alexander Butterfield review revealed that those tapes were there, and the court ordered him to produce those tapes, there, we reached the time for impeachment, and that's in a bipartisan way. The congress went to him and says to leave or be impeached, and he left. Well, we could very well through these hearings come up with this smoking gun that will do for us today. What those tapes did with Richard Nixon before? Well, so let's go through the process, and that making get what respectfully certain. Let's take each of those two cases because I think the analogies between Donald Trump and Richard Nixon actually pretty close in a lot of ways. But in that instance, you had a Republican party that was not nearly as sort of vehemently reflexively partisan, as their party of. Now, there are a lot of Republicans now that will behave where Republicans, then did people like Lindsey Graham and others have made it clear protecting, Trump is what they're doing. And then the second thing is with Clinton. What actually happened is that, you know, Republicans lost seats in the house, but they held the house. They held the Senate. They then made Bill Clinton useless to Albor. They rendered him inert. They then won the White House as well. Republicans did not pay a price for impeaching Bill Clinton and Bill Clinton was popular. Donald Trump is not popular. So is this analogy missing? The point because Bill Clinton and Donald Trump are very different. Their popularity is very different going in the reason that they would be impeach is very different. And the outcome for Republicans was actually pretty darn good about impeaching, Bill Clinton. Good for them. Well, did not pay did not pay as bigger price, you're right as I would've love to see them pay. But we did mix them Hisako gains, you didn't check off near the house, nor the Senate Democrats did not get back a single body and Bill Clinton was no longer running for President Bill Clinton, just simply was not able to campaign for Al Gore. I mean, what price did Republicans pay? Well, I think they pay the price in the presidential elections. Do the. As soon as we wanted it. I'm sorry, but they won. They beat Al Gore. Yes, they did. Because the courts awarded it to them will all remember what happened down in Florida. We see what happened in the last election. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, but I do believe that Trump was correct. When you said things were rid through the electoral college, things got rid, and we were subjected to the Russian influence, we were subjected to all kinds of suppressions the kinds of things the will to be prepared for today and same thing is going gonna happen today. If we don't get prepared. Well, that's what I was going to make the point because right that William bar has essentially opened the door for it to be perfectly legal for to seek help again. So you have to presume, Donald Trump gonna do the exact same things, again, so he's going to go in with the advantages of foreign interference and attorney general that's going to help him voter suppression, all the things that he. In two thousand sixteen but he also is gonna have not been sanctioned for the things that we know he did for the ten instances of obstruction of Justice that already happened. And quite bluntly surfer define you guys. He's literally saying care if you subpoena me. So if he goes in already feeling invincible I'm not sure have not impeaching him. Alters, his behavior. He's getting away with everything. He's doing. Here's gotten a with us far that doesn't mean he will be getting away in the fall of the year, or the first part of next year, I do believe that we are on track to get into where we need to be to bring the public along with us. And to even change some of the mines in the Senate. I know that we have to get to two thirds of the Senate in order for the ground. Swell to be there that will cause Mitch McConnell and others. The sit down with this president and tell him the jig is up. Do you really whatever you, you really think Mitch McConnell ever reality is impeachment is never resulted in removal? So impeach is its own separate sanction. It's the highest sanction that, that you, you know, all in the house can put on a president is literally the ultimate rebuke. And that's all it's ever been it separate from removal. Is there any chance at all a single Republican in the Senate is ever? Going to vote to convict it. Can't it be its own sanction? I don't know that you have to get to the point of voting to convey, we got to that, Richard Nixon, and we never had to go to impeachment trial. I think Mitch McConnell if the folks in Kentucky route a rise up and says, hey guy, you have got to fulfill your responsibilities. I think he would lay himself on the alter of Donald Trump. I Mitch McConnell little better than that. I'm not a big fan of Mitch but I know that Mitchell never lay himself on the alter of Donald Trump. Okay. Well, we, we shall see we will continue to watch and we really appreciate your time. Congressman James Clyburn. Thank you very much. Really appreciate it. Thank you, sir. All right. And coming up, we're going to expand this conversation with our all star panel. That's next. Hi, it's Katy Tur. Wanna keep up with MSNBC while you're on the go. Subscribe to the NBC daily newsletter. You'll get the best of what you've missed during this unprecedented era of news, text MSNBC to six eight six six to subscribe. Pasa gain information. The public deserves to know the truth. Yes. Facts. When you go down to pass light peach mint, which is very device that they could divide the country because it is divisive. We have to try to bring people together speaker Pelosi appeared on Jimmy Kimmel Thursday night, still wouldn't commit to impeachment even after hearing Robert Muller pretty much congress. Here's the ball. It's yours. Take going home. His alias style editor of LA dot com. David jolly former Republican congressman, who's no longer affiliated with the Republican party and grey zone, air chief public affairs officer for move on dot org. All right to start with you at the debacle. I want you to just respond. Well, I want you to respond to it because I take a hate the phrase, take them at their word actually really hate that. I I'm gonna use it anyway. I take the leadership at their word that they generally do not want to beach. I think it's genuine. I don't think they're making that and their argument for it seems to be based on the experiences that they personally had during the Bill Clinton impeachment, and they recall from Nixon, that is what the congressman argued, and that he believes if they just keep getting more information, somehow, Republicans will act the way they did during the Nixon and not the way they did during the Clinton impeachment. So there couple of things that Clyburn said that, I think deserve immediate pushback, one is this democratic fascination with a smoking gun. This is the smoking gun. The mole report is this mocking gun. Yeah. Had this gun. It is on. Fight. All right. So that's so this searched for the smoking gun is ridiculous. We have it. Let's go number two. And this is this is the key thing. And you saw when he brought up Nixon. He said, well, when the court order Nixon to, to give up the tapes, that's what Nixon realized the jig is up. Donald Trump will not give up the tapes, I even if they found this mythical gun that they think is still hiding there. If Trump has it, he won't give it up. He's already proven that he is right now in violation of the court order ordering him to release takes. Yeah, so I don't I don't understand why if they're not going to, if not gonna peach any president, if they're not going to them. Now when are they going to do it February during the democratic national convention, if not now then win Saint if not him then who and all their other arguments? Oh, we have to bring the American people along. He hasn't tried to bring, of course, the polls aren't on our side. They've spent six weeks since the release of the mall. Reply. The democratic leadership has spent six weeks, since release of the remote report. Trying to tell me why we can't impeach him as opposed to trying to tell the American people why we must of course, the polls aren't on our side. David, let me, let me. Because you were in you were a Republican. There's a sense. I have. That Republicans consents democratic fear, and I don't mean this is the producer, listen. I'm a lifelong democrat. I'm not trying to digital rats. But the Republicans understand that Democrats operate for position of being very nervous about rupturing the public mood, and that they really believe that the process has to be stable, and that the American people need to be brought a lot, and they are afraid of rocking the boat and that Republicans take advantage of that because when they flagrantly defy Democrats, and they flagrantly sort of smack them around. They know they're not going to get hit back and so they just keep hitting them. So what we say Donald Trump is a guy who respond to that kind of strength. You love dictators. He loves that kind of show of force are Democrats is the reason Democrats are kind of seeming to lose this battle because they won't show force back to somebody who's using force using maximum resistance against them, though. Sure. Because House, Democrats and Republicans, but the congress has taken to. Vacation since Mullah report has come out and it's functional only working three day workweeks like Nancy Pelosi does not want peach. She does not want to teach that is clear that absolutely clear, James Clyburn. Whether he personally, thanks so we're not as willing to go along with Nancy Pelosi out of loyalty to her leadership in her decision. So what I think the disconnected a lot of people are feeling not just Democrats. But those who performed as Democrats in twenty eighteen asking for for greater oversight, even if you were to buy into the Nancy Pelosi strategy that James Clyburn just articulated, that we need more hearings that we have to draw this out. Even if that is the case, we're not seeing the urgency in that joy, right? If Nancy Pelosi made the case of the country that look, we need months of hearings and because of that we're calling the congress back to Washington, and we're going to do this five days a week on national TV. So the American people can see it now you're more. You're in a more believable position that Nancy Pelosi really means business. But instead, what is. Conveying. I think a lot of people who are questioning her strategy. Some believe it those who questioned it say you know, I'm not sure I believe the speaker is really taking us in a direction. I think she's getting dragged in the direction and that that's an uncertain time for voters to be looking at the speaker. Yeah. Corrine and move on his is in the messaging business of, really moving public opinion. The weird thing is probably the two people who've made the best sort of sinked articulation of why impeachments should happen or a former Republican Elizabeth Warren and occur, Republican named Justin they've made the most sinked case and let me play Justin think pronounce his name wrong Ammash on on Wednesday. You saw what happened to me from our so-called leader, Kevin McCarthy, I, I read the Muller report, I'm sure he did not read it. I stated what it actually says, and he just resorted to ad hominem attacks and, and other various attacks that have nothing to do with the report, this is the kind of leadership in quotes that we now have in congress. That is the biggest abuse of power right now, happening in our government that needs to be addressed because if you wonder why the president the executive has so much power, whether it was Bronco Gama or Donald Trump, or any other executive why they have so much power. It's because congress is incompetent. Congress is impotent. They don't do their job this notion of congress being impotent that the president could just run over them. Is is, is it because just an mosh is based libertarian, he's able to articulate that a little bit more clearly? Why do you suppose? Democrats are having such a hard time explaining to the public why what Donald Trump is doing to abuse power is important. Yeah. I have to say it would just an aim. It's clearly like in his in his realm. Right. What he saying being the libertarian, where he stands. He's known for being principal. He came through the tea party kind of era. And we have to remember that is a that is a subtly red district, and he got a standing ovation from his own constituency, so that, that says a lot on how he's messaging and how they feel about him. Look. This is not Watergate. We are. This is so much worse than what we're seeing and Watergate, so the comparison that they make is wrong. We are living in abnormal times. We see a Saturday night massacre practically every week and yes, Donald Trump. He he sees the weakness in congress. He sees that they're not gonna impeachment impeach him. They he sees that Nancy Pelosi is basically saying she's not going there and because of the fear of the fear of the past, but the president is so much more dangerous and they are. The first of state, they have the power. The framers gave them the power to do to make sure to hold the president accountable. This is what the base the democratic base. One of them to do to be oversight like David said in twenty eighteen and they're letting that all go and, you know, it's not about polls. It's not about politics. It's about just making sure this president is held accountable, and they are going to set a terrible precedent if they don't do this with Donald Trump, then what happens with the next president, that's probably going to be worse, or just as bad, and it's a very scary thing to see. And we just have to keep pushing them and saying, this is not okay. But you know what joy this is the scary thing. At some point it's going to be too late at some points to be too late to move with this. And so we're going to be put in a really terrible predicament. Very quickly, a quick lightning round. Let me very quickly, David fromm on the show later. He has an article is a piece of the Atlantic where he argues don't impeach. And that if. By focusing on all of these issues by doing all these different many, many hearings Democrats are able to really keep Donald Trump trying to put his finger in the dike everywhere, and you can't do it. So that's one good reason to do it the way they're doing it now. That they're letting their presidential candidates actually campaign instead of all being on, should it be removed or not. And it should be on all the different wrongs and that they can always push impeachment. If he wins reelection into the next. We're going to that. That's a great strategy. Let's let let's let them win again. And then tried on him the last thing I want to say is this, like, when we talk about the polls, I think it's important for people to understand that were that the black community, the black and Brown community is overwhelmingly in favor of impeachment. The democratic base is overwhelmingly in favor of impeachment. The people who aren't are kind of white people in the middle, right? It's three truck drivers that Jacobs. Over off interviewed at his either at a diner. Those are the people who were not sure about impeachment. So if Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats have at some point at knowledge their base, I think they're more worried about the Trump base and what they can do jolly. David jolly. Is there any chance at all that Mitch McConnell would not ride? Right to the very end with Donald Trump. And his Clyburn seem to believe there's some, some other little point to be made in that will change Mitch McConnell's mind. You believe that I think Clyburn point was if the voters of Kentucky become so overwhelmingly in favor of impeachment AB McConnell, reconsiders. But we saw his comments on America Arlen. No, he's a he's a silent killer. Look, I'm glad you brought up the ninety eight politics with Clyburn. I was on the hill at the time. We remembered the exile. There was a lot of chaos. But you're right. Republicans did just find in the next election. Yeah. Fast forward to the twenty eighteen politics. Joy, yeah. A lot of people did vote for policy that is true. There's not a single democratic voter. It's a diverse coalition. But a lot of people voted for exactly this oversight moment, and the reality is, if Nancy Pelosi says, we're about policy, there's no way to deliver policy next year in a divided government. There is a way to deliver oversight and impeach now aren't LA. In Corrine are gonna join us later on David, thank you very much. Really appreciate it. Thank you. Coming up. We will show you how presidential candidates are. Bonding to Friday news. Virginia. It is our constitutional responsibility as members of congress to bring an a judgment of impeachment against this president. The judiciary committee should begin impeachment inquiries, he told us enough to interpret what he said as a referral for impeachment proceedings. This is as close to an impeachment referral as you could get. I actually believe it's a mistake, not to go forward with impeachment. Those were just some of twenty twenty democratic candidates, reacting to Robert Muller statement, this week, reiterating that the evidence gathered does not Donald Trump of obstruction of Justice while Muller's remarks have fueled new calls from peach men among democratic candidates has speaker Nancy Pelosi as we've heard throughout the show, remains cautious. So does that mean that it's up to the twenty twenty democratic nominee eventually to the fight on impeachment? Joining me now, Kimberly Atkins of Boston public radio station WB. You are Maria Theresa Kamar voter Latino in Korean jump here. Move on dot org, who's also moderate. The big ideas for them with democratic presidential candidates today at three forty five pm eastern the audience might have suggested questions for you. Check your Twitter. Let's start with you, Kimberly because. We were having a conversation after the block with, with Elliott. I think we all agree that it might be cleaner for the democratic leadership to just come out and say, just as speaker Pelosi took impeachment off the table. With George W Bush, when she became speaker, the first time, just take it on the table and save not going to happen. So that then the base of process, what it is that they are going to do, what do you make that? And is it likely that at some point in your reporting that the leadership is just gonna come out and say, listen, we're not doing? Yeah. I think it's still unclear. I think at this point Nancy Pelosi is in a position that she is a head of caucus that is still not completely unified on this issue. And when she first said, impeachment was off the table, the vast majority of the Democrats within her caucus, we're not area, they were not pushing for impeachment is only a small percentage that was there and she was trying to provide cover for everyone. Well, now there is an increasing number it feels like every week, more and more members of the house are saying that they either want impeachment or they're leaning toward it. And so now, Nancy Pelosi's in the position of not only protecting the people whose constituents want impeachment, but also protecting the members whose constituents don't, and I think that's this dance that you're seeing, I think if there is a continued groundswell the way that we've seen it among the democratic candidates for president. I mean that's been quick shift from when they mostly weren't calling for impeachment. Now, they mostly are if we see the same thing happened in house. I think we may see movement. It in the other direction. I think it'll be more and more difficult for her to not say, hey, let's at least start the inquiry right merchants. You've got just an is from the midwest. Right. So it's not as if mid westerners are hard core against at least considering some sanction if the president committed a lot wrongdoing. But it definitely sort of occurred to me a bit that it may take a presidential candidate who then calls the tune. Once you have a nominee that person is going to then lead more than the congress will what the direction of the party is going to be if you look at the people who are already saying, yes, impeachment. It's comma hairs Elizabeth, Warren. It's beto. It's Seth Moulton. It's Kirsten gillibrand. And by the way, that molten challenge, Nancy Pelosi and took a lot of heat for that the for her leadership. Kirsten gillibrand Cory Booker holding on Castro Buddha. Judge John Hickenlooper, Wayne mess him in Florida. So you could it be that maybe the thing is, is that the congressional what congress has to worry about Kimberly said is, is getting. All the members reelected, including the mid, western members, they think are in pro-trump district so that maybe it really is going to be up to the presidential nominee to push this. I think it has to be a full court press across across congress to do, actually, the work that the constitution demands of them while also doing it with the presidential candidates that they differentiate themselves, it can't be just about impeachment. It has to be they absolutely have to be able to points on the board. Joy and demonstrate this is how we would legislate differently, but not doing impeachment. Basically sends a resounding message to the democratic base that disproportionately young disproportionately people of color, saying, you know what if you are white privilege, if you're the president all of a sudden, you can get away with it. But if you are a kid that basically crosses the line and speeds too fast. You find yourself in jail. It sends a resounding message that there are two rules in two sets of laws for two different people, and that's not okay. Individuals have to feel inspired. They have to feel like someone is fighting for them. And if anything taught us is the fact that a Republican congressman received a standing ovation for speaking the truth. And the truth is, what unites the American people is this idea that there's a sense of equal fairness that there's going to be actual consequences. If you do something, unjustly, and the president has clearly done something that is still incredibly Paik, but that has to be, basically brought to Justice, and let's not forget the Republicans new effectively how to basically bring down a presidential candidate when they had a president secretary Clinton go into the Gaza hearings year after year. That's all they talked about, because it also basically provided a dig into her character so that when the presidential Kennett went after her on the election. There was a lot of nuances in questions about her character they have to use every single arrow in their quiver. And by the way, they call those pre impeachment here. There were literally Republican members said, oh, we're pre impeaching if she wins, we're they made it very clear. They would be right now on that point the to be kind of two Americas. The two sets of rules for black and Brown young people. I just saw when they see us than credit. Able to two. There are two sets of rules for the rich, the poor, the black, the white that, you know, Donny Deutsch, who's an ad guy said that's her message Democrats to set the rules, Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell and their public play by one. All y'all play by the other. Here's Elizabeth Warren, saying, roughly, the same thing on the view. If he were anyone other than president of the United States, he would be in handcuffs and indict it, it's a point of our constitution. It's a point of each one of us who sworn oath to the constitution saying that is not permissible for president of the United that, that's it two sets of rules move on dot org for whom you work jump. Here was created as simple messaging, try to tell the country to move on from trying to impeach Bill Clinton will not remember that is why there is a move on. Right. And so Democrats say it plain and simple as that there are two sets of rules. Donald Trump is playing by one because he's rich and powerful rich, white guy, nobody else could get away with this. They can't formulate sentence and joy. They're letting him get away with it. They're not holding him accountable. You know, we've heard from more than a thousand federal prosecutors, both Republicans and Democrats saying that if he was not president as, as what Elizabeth Warren was. He would be indicted. I mean this is where we are today. And Robert Muller made it really clear to many of us that congress needs to act like he can't do anymore here it is. Here's a smoking gun, please. Go and act. So I think it's pretty clear for twenty twenty candidates what they need to do. They need to have a clear message that says, okay. Donald Trump, who is the president of the United State is using his power to, to basically not just enrich himself, but to obstruct Justice to protect himself and his family that is what he is doing. That's part of the message. And what he is doing right now, makes Watergate, just looks like just shameful what he's doing. I mean there there is no comparison there. And then in the same breath, say, okay, this is how we're going to move this country forward here. Here's how we're going to pull ourselves out of this whole, that Republicans have put us in the Donald Trump is put us in with these hateful policies that they continue to put out that hurts. Marginalized community in particular, the base, the base of the base. Of the Democratic Party, and that's it. There is not that hard. What are you going to do to move the country forward and holding Donald Trump accountable? That's the message. That's mentioned with the Democrats need to do into twenty and I wonder Kimberley, if you're if you're starting to see democratic candidates realize, this is something and run on so set molten in a lot of people's minds made a huge miscalculation trying to challenge. Nancy Pelosi a woman to be speaker after woman had been denied the presidency, but that's really optically bad. But now he's running on saying, no not only for impeachment. But I'm the only guy who's in the house that can actually vote on impeachment. Like he's actually not leaning into that. It's at the point now, we're Joe Biden, who's generally tried to be very mild man, or toward the other side, saying we might end up having to impeach our twenty twenty candidates now starting to formulate impeachment as a message because it is working for candidates like Elizabeth Warren. Yes, I think you're increasingly seeing that. I mean look, I think that I think that it's right. That that's not all the Democrats need to focus on if they wanna win. They wanna they need to talk about the kitchen table issue. As well. But you were seeing a lot of candidates do both Elizabeth. Warren is a great example of that. She has a plan for everything in this week. She came out with a plan for reversing DOJ policy that says a sitting president can't be indicted, she's in both of these lanes at the same time, which is in contrast to someone like Joe Biden, who was trying to be this reconciliate reconciliatory figure try to bring the country together and not focus so much on Trump. I think that is a difference. You will see among a lot of the candidates pushing forward. But I think that Elizabeth Warren and some of these other candidates do have that cover to talk about this to push this, but remember along the way that even if the house brings impeachment articles against the president, not they're probably not going to he's not going to get convicted in the Senate. So in that sense, it is in a way sort of a theoretical exercise. And I think that if anything gives these candidates more cover. It's something that they can push for, they don't have to necessarily be able to stand up and say. I did or did not vote for it the way that Seth Moulton would if they do bring it forward, but it, it gives them cover for that. But yeah. I think they are trying to feel what they're hearing when they're out campaigning, and they hear people calling for this, and they're trying to respond to it. Yeah. The town halls these members are gonna have this summer going to be interesting really Adkins. Thank you very much. Have you back on the show are interested Kamar and commune Trump here back in our next hour. And coming up, one of our favorite conservative guests that Nancy is actually handling Donald Trump perfectly that is nuts. He, he knows it's not a good idea to be impeached. The silver lining for him is, then he believes that he would be exonerated by the United States Senate. And there is a school of thought that says that the Senate acquits Hugh. Why bring a charges against him in the private sector when he's no longer president? So when we go that with, with our case, it'd be are clad. You've heard speaker Pelosi stance and so far, she's sticking to it. The number of Capitol Hill Democrats who disagree with her is now up to fifty two plus one Republican Justin mosh. And you can really feel the growing frustration both among elected Democrats, and for many in the democratic base about the lack of visible tangible action to counter what Donald Trump is doing to the presidency. But of course, not everyone agrees not when agrees that blows. He's take is wrong this week in the Atlantic. OG never-trumper, David fromm wrote a piece proposing that the wisest remedy is not impeachment and David from senior editor at the Atlantic, and author of Trump accuracy, the corruption of the American Republic joins me now all rights are make your make your case. Why is Pelosi right Pelosi is right? I there is no question that Donald Trump is corrupt authoritarian dangerous in the presidency as you kindly said, I wrote a whole book about it second the result of an impeachment process will be quibble by the Senate. There's just no likelihood that anything else will happen when you talk about impeachment you ever say, what is the result? Not only. Impeachment in the house, but of an impeachment trial in the Senate, and the failure remove and hardening Donald Trump in office, and I argue that the consequences of that will be very serious. It will be treated. It is not an exoneration not to be removed, but the president will treated such, and he will use the process to mobilize his supporters, many people who don't like what he's doing. But who will not want to see him removed from office, and one last thing, I think people need to take seriously is not impossible that Donald Trump gets reelected in twenty twenty incumbent presidents usually do. And if the impeachment remedy is begun unsuccessfully now, how is it possible to use it in more likely be more favorable and more urgent circumstances in the very real possible event of Trump's second term? Okay. Let that is your. Case lead push back in a couple of things. First thing if impeachment is not used against the president who is openly corrupt and openly defying, not just the congress. The courts then is not impeachment dead letter because impeachment is never actually removed a president. But is it is a sanction that puts a stamp on a president of corruption? If it's not used on Trump shouldn't it just be written out of the constitution impeachment has been successful in two occasions. It's true that we didn't go through to removal. But Richard Nixon was forced from office, a successful impeachment process that was not completed and Andrew Johnson, although he was not removed. He was saved by one vote completely reversed are slut largely reverses reconstruction, policies, didn't run for reelection and was replaced by s grant as a result in great part of that process. I would call both those processes successful the process against Bill Clinton was not successful. It was rejected by close to sixty percent of the American people. Donald Trump is going to forty percent of the American people with him through this process. Is not going to lead to his removal. He's got a majority in the Senate impeachment is not a dead letter. It is a ready weapon. Use it wisely because you can only use it once. Well, let me use your Andrew Johnson, and your Bill Clinton examples to make the counterpoint in the case of Andrew Johnson, the stamp of impeachment to your point prevented him from having another term in the case of Bill Clinton. It prevented him from being all useful to Al Gore, who was seeking a first term, Al Gore, not only rejected campaigning with Bill Clinton, who had the stamp of impeachment on him. He picked the most pro impeachment or censure, or anti-clinton democrat Joe Lieberman that he could find. So wouldn't Donald Trump be rendered because he's much less popular. Bill Clinton was actually popular when they impeach. Donald Trump's the most unpopular president modern history wouldn't. He then be stamped with impeachment and have to run as a tainted president, I run into twenty twenty. Yeah. I don't think so. I think the politics of the two cases are different. And by the way, Al Gore, probably would have been wise to ask Bill Clinton campaign for him. Indeed. He couldn't make up his mind because of impeachment piece rendered him inert. He that I think there are deeper psychic reasons why he didn't want. He didn't do that. And I said that in any way disrespectfully, he wanted to show himself as his own as his own political force, but let's just look at now if this begins this process begins, I it will suck energy from all of the other investigations, that are more important. I think it's a false choice to say it's impeachment or nothing. Remember the subpoenas to get the accounting documents those are moving impressively quickly before the election. Congress will have the Donald Trump's Deutsche Bank records the tax return fight is moving somewhat slower and that may not be completed before the election. But there's going to be an inquiry into the Muller investigation there. I think a total of twenty investigations at indifferent. I mean if drones and drones drones investigations. How would anyone follow them if they're not collected under one giant impeachment inquiry that could pull in all those things into one coherent narrative to Donny Deutsch point, call it a criminal trial of Donald Trump. Don't call beaches. This is the criminal investigation of Donald Trump. Well, that's a powerful point. But bear in mind, these things, I many of the things most to be worried about Donald Trump are not criminal as Bob Muller show. The connections between Trump and Russia. We're not criminal conspiracy. They presented national security problem account intelligence problem, but they're not criminal. The second thing is that what changes people's minds are facts? These investigations produce information about things, Donald Trump has done, they haven't accumulating impact. Once you have an impeachment investigation, you're not talking about facts anymore. The energy will be to talk about the remedy, and Donald Trump's argument will be whatever you think of what I did removal is not the way to go. Well, it is an interesting debate you back, and we'll do this debate again. Thank you very much. Everybody read his article and read his book, David Frum. Thank you very much. Okay. And before we go to break earlier, we told you that Donald Trump had not yet commented on the mass shooting last night in Virginia Beach. Well, just minutes after reported that he tweeted his condolences to the community more after the break. I think one of the ironies today is that people are saying that it's President Trump that shredding our institutions. I really see. No evidence of that, from my perspective, the idea of resisting democratically elected president and basically throwing everything had him. And and you know. Really changing the norms on the grounds that we have to stop this president. That's where the shredding of our of our norms, and our institutions occurring. Good morning and welcome to AM joy. Well, that was your turn general William bar in an interview with CBS news saying he sees absolutely nothing weird about Donald Trump's behaviors president, according to bar, even Trump's tweets all in good fun. What bar does think is strange? Is that anyone in the intelligence community would investigate in American presidential campaign, getting help from hostile foreign power because who on us hasn't gotten a little assist from the Russians from time to time like many other people who are familiar with intelligence activities? I had a lot of questions about going on. I soon I get answers when I went in and I have not gotten answers that are all satisfactory, and in fact, probably more questions. And at some of the facts that I've learned, don't hang together with the official explanations of what happened. Well VAR was asked on whether he worries about his reputation history because that's what we should all be concerned about his reputation. And he pretty much said did anyway. So well. At the end of my career, I've, you know, the reputation that you've worked your whole life on you have everyone dies, and I'm not, you know. I don't believe in the America idea that, you know, immortality comes by having owed some the shoe over the centuries. Well, all right, there you go during now Elliott style editor of about a lot dot com for FBI special agent. Clint watts. He's also the author of the book messing with the enemy MSNBC contributor, Malcolm. Nance is the author of the book the plot to destroy democracy and Barbara mcquade. Former US attorney gonna have to come to this. I bar said, and I'm just going to reread you, his quote, the he thinks the irony is that people are saying it's Donald Trump, shredding our institutions. He says, I really see. No evidence of that, from my perspective, the idea of resisting democratically elected president and basically throwing everything at him. And you know, really changing the norms on the ground that we have to stop this president. That's where the treading of our norms. And institutions are I wonder if he was around during the full scale massive resistance against Barack Obama's presidency by his party Bill Clinton by his party? Sometimes with his, I think he was involved in trying to push the whitewater narrative to try to stop Bill Clinton from being democratically elected. What is he saying that he thinks that what's abnormal is for the intelligence community, to have tried to investigate a candidate for president getting help from foreign power and he thinks that is the norm? Breaking what do you make of that, Malcolm? You know, it's like he thinks this building behind me is just a post office. I mean, his whole mindset is that the American experiment, this entire process of three separate but equal branches of government shouldn't exist and that all the power should exist in a unitary executive who is like a Supreme Soviet and that anyone that takes anytime to look into any malfeasance of this particular player. Donald Trump is the problem. I mean this man is not the attorney general of the United States. I'm gonna put it on the table. It is very obvious. This is Donald Trump's political commissar. He is there as the party chief chieftain, who is there to enforce ideological loyalty, and he will not hold truck for any investigations. It's a shame and you know, Barbara mcquade he did sound a bit like the hand of the king to use a game of thrones reference the way he talks about. Central power, but his history is that he only has this monarchical view of the presidency that Malcolm just describe when the president is a Republican. He had that view when it was George Herbert Walker Bush. He has that view. Now. He didn't always have that view. It is a warping. I wanted to hear the CBS reporter asked him. What do you believe are the limits of presidential power? That was the question. I wanted to ask, what do you think is answer about have been? Well, if you look at his nineteen page memo that he submitted last summer to the department of Justice unsolicited, he has a very extreme view of executive power, he subscribes to this theory of the unitary executive, which is that the president is all powerful within the executive branch and therefore cannot commit obstruction of Justice, if he is doing something in the execution of his powers now, I think that's an absurd reading of the constitution, which says that the president shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, if you're a textualist word faithfully mean something, and it means executing the laws in the best interest of the country, and not in the best interest of yourself. Yeah, it is pretty remarkable, because he definitely believes that when there's a Republican Clinton. I'm not sure he believes that winter, the democrat we'd have to see that for another time the other thing that he said that I thought was pretty remarkable because he almost was trying to talk about Cohen. Tell pro as if Donald Trump's campaign was the civil rights movement, and the FBI investigators who knows. Noticed that Russian actors trying to infiltrate that campaign would like the co Intel pro guys. That's how he's sort of describing them. Here he is talking about his concerns that domestic intelligence law enforcement, which he now is in charge of our two political there. Republican fallen because of praetorian-guard mentality where government officials get very arrogant. They identify the national interest with their own political preferences, and they feel that anyone who. As different opinion, somehow an enemy of the state, and there is that tendency that they know better. And you know that they're there to protect as guardians of the people. First of all the president. He serves the king whose hand he is caused the press the enemy of the people. So it's interesting that he thinks what he seems to be saying there is a very political argument that in his view the FBI agents who investigated the Trump campaign's contacts with foreign actors just headed political objection to Donald Trump as a person. They didn't like his politics. So they launched a completely fraudulent investing. That is the conspiracy theory, Donald Trump believes in what does it mean to the FBI agents, and investigators who are now on the job that their boss believes that any attempts to look into Donald Trump's contacts with four knackers? Is it self behaving Pretorious guard and his illegitimate? Why is he attorney general doing? Interviews, the attorney general answers questions, he doesn't raise them. And so every time he goes out, and does one of these interviews. He is advancing the conspiracy without evidence. The attorney general job is to present evidence on the basis of cases year ago when he's out in the private sector and hanging out in west right in nineteen page mental is the right to do that. He's a need to be asking questions and sewing conspiracy. He also never brings up that the reason this started probably from the F B is perspective, is that American citizens were hacked. He never brings up that our secretary stay was hacked that general Colin Powell was hacked, the NATO commander, he doesn't bring up any of this, and that had been going on for months, even up to a year. So maybe the FBI head very good reason to start looking into why all these Russian influence efforts keep targeting the Clinton campaign keep trying to infiltrate the Trump campaign. Why is all this happening? He doesn't bring that up. He's more worried about is there any sort of bias by the investigators? And he doesn't put any context on it. Look, the attorney general was very critical of who James Comey for coming out, remember, in having a press conference when it was influencing the election. So I do in Meyer bar in the sense that, okay, we need to stick in institutional norms. We don't need to have a deep state or someone trying to throw bias in there, but he's throwing bias and thereby raising the question and night advancing any evidence. Can we play one more this to this is where? And again, there's a lot of push back at what he's saying, which really kind of freaked me out listening to this. But here he is having the spine conversation. Ticketless. Testified that you believe spine occurred into the Trump campaign. You've gotten some criticism for using that word. I mean, I guess it's become a dirty word somehow it has never been for me. I think there's nothing wrong with spying question is always, whether it's authorized by law. If you are current agent and you discover that the Saudis are attempting to help reelect Donald Trump. Are you now afraid that your boss thinks that it would be spying for you to look into that? This is killing counterintelligence investigations. If you're a foreign state right now, the smartest play if you want to create cast in the US are influence, the election is just to make contact with everybody on every campaign, you can because you're really testing whether the FBI can look into it at all what I have heard. No explanation, the last two years, three years about win, the FBI counterintelligence be allowed to look into whether a foreign countries trying to infiltrate another campaign. I don't understand the circumstances. The individuals that they did start to look into from my perspective. When I look at it, it's obvious to me why they would want to look at it. I don't understand why they would not look at it. And if they don't look at it under those circumstances, when would they it sounds like we just won't do it at all? And if you're in counterintelligence agent, the FBI right now, you must be like, I'm not gonna do anything. Thing because what will happen, I will be investigated by even bring up any of these allegations. If even evidence I might as well, get my own FBI agents association attorney to start defending me because they're probably going to be investigating me next. And the thing is Elliott, that crystallized kind of the horror for the American people is that he seems to be doing that, for his own politics. He's claiming that all of these institutions have become politicized, but it's quite clear from his memo on that. He desires the advancement of the Trump presidency. And so he could essentially forced down investigations terrify investigators say, do not stop this foreign interference. So the political outcome that empowers him by the way he now can declassify things. He's enjoying this power. That is what at least the appearance is his politics are, are on the table as well. Grimace is sitting in his hunting, lodge, projecting a misinformation campaign upon the American. People and as a person with legal training. It's particularly frustrating to me because I understand that most people don't have the training to understand exactly. And how this man is lying. So the part of the interview that I found kind of most troubling is when he kind of seamlessly rolled over this issue about how, like, oh, well, clearly Muller couldn't have indicted, the president, that's unconstitutional. However, he could have reached a conclusion that the president should have been indicted, even though he didn't have the power to indict him. That is a lie. We don't want prosecutors saying, oh, I would charge that person. But I'm not gonna because what that means that the victim of the charge, then doesn't get their day in court. Tonight themselves. If Muller had done exactly what bar said that Muller coulda done in real time bar with a flipped. His foot outfit. Yeah. Right. Eight is not unconstitutional to charge a sitting president. There's nothing in the constitution that says that right? It can't be unconstitutional because. If it was you'd have to change the taught station from president to king. Right. Right. Well, but, you know, Barbara mcquade I've had friends who are attorneys. I obviously not call him a monarchist and say what he's in what he is advancing is view of an American monarchy. The, the president is essentially king when he's a Republican. Well, I think that his remarks at his original press briefing in his letter and to the Senate in many ways are inconsistent with each other. And so when it appears that he is not being fully honest. It creates a vacuum and people will look to see what is his motivation here. What is he trying to do? And so it does seem like it feeds into that narrative that he will protect this president at any cost. You know, the idea even that because Robert Mueller chose not to make a traditional prosecution decision left it to the attorney general to decide where did that come from. I mean he really stepped into that void and decided it for himself. And I think when Robert Muller came out the other day he made it clear that his he saw his job as preserving evidence, so that future, prosecutors when this president is no longer in office, could consider whether to charge, and because there is a mechanism other than the criminal Justice system for holding presidents account. Dible that is congress by impeachment. He was preserving this evidence for them. And William bar has said, that's that's nonsense. So he really appointed himself to be the supervisor over the special counsel, which really obviates the whole purpose of a special counsel, which is to take partisan politics out of it. And Malcolm, are we in a position, very quickly, very sort of time you in? Clint we in a position where twenty sixteen is just going to get repeated. But now with an attorney general says it's fine. Oh, yeah. I think twenty sixteen is going to be a low point. And I think what we're gonna see certainly from our opponents. They have no gateways to them now they can do what ever they want. Not only with the president of the United States support, it, the attorney general, the United States will neutralize US intelligence, US, law enforcement and homeland security to investigating anything. Really, I'm telling you wish to call this guy commissar bar because this is really a communist way of running things. I wish it was as a monarchy, but it's not this is a far -tarian is at its finest very quickly. We're out of time. Are we in trouble here because it doesn't see that there's anything preventing another twenty sixteen? No, I mean, the agency's individually taken some pretty good actions, the FBI, you're seeing them do NSA in particular do things to advance cause, but there's no unity in the after they gonna get in trouble if they do that they cover prosecute them. Well, if it doesn't suit it makes me. Concern. I would like to finish his new attorney general bar is doing a review in the investigation. I'm actually four that I look, if they did the right thing, it will come out. They did the right thing investigation. They should be cleared of that. But during the discussion, imagine if Muller and Rosenstein, over the last two years came out and interview every couple of good man. I got a lot of questions pretty bad. Yeah. And then left. I mean that's not serving the public in any way. Let's all be hopeful that if his review comes out favorably to the investigators that he'll tell us that. Yes. Because he gets to tell us what fines, and we don't know what he's going to say, and that's what I think scares a lot of people Elliott style. Clint watts Malcolm Nance Barbara mcquade. Thank you very much coming up could Georgia's full-scale attack on women's rights cost the state, it's Hollywood moment, and how they would exit. It becomes law. It'll be very difficult to produce rather doubt we will. I don't think you want. I think many people work for us will not want to work there and we'll have to their wishes in that regard right now. We're watching it, very carefully. Disney is one of a fast growing list of entertainment, companies threatening to pull film and television projects out of Georgia. If the state's new highly restrictive abortion law goes into effect of Khadka drastically altered, Georgia's economic landscape, where film and television production yielded, a nine point five billion billion with a B dollar hall for the state in two thousand eighteen alone to me. Now it's Theresa Tomlinson, the former mayor of Columbus, Georgia, who's currently running for the United States Senate, and Judd Lega, author and founder of politics, newsletter, popular information that I saw this in your newsletter. How many companies are pulling out or thinking about it? Well, I think there's, there's no companies that I know of who said they're pulling out now. But I think why net flicks is said, what Bob idir said is that if the co? Courts, do not strike this law down. Or at least put a temporary. Hold on it, then they will think about probably will pull out. So it's a very fairly serious thing to say, but we haven't really seen the mass. I think you've seen individual actors and producers say that they, they're no longer going to work in your job. Right. And, you know, Theresa, you know, you've had sort of contempt to us responses by Brian camp. The current governor he'd sort of sort of puts down the Hollywood types that are out that in his mind out of touch just with the law does prohibiting abortion heartbeat is detected exceptions in the case of health. Rape, and incest, ten years in prison for doctors that kind of thing, here's what Stacey Abrams has said about this idea about boycott and take a listen. In this instance, we have leaders who do not care. They legitimately have rejected the idea that it matters if we lose the dollars here because they know that they can make money in other ways. But more importantly, they know that they can demonize Hollywood try to take their resources, but not accept the responsibility of protecting the women in the state of Georgia. And so while I support those who want to live their values by not bringing the resources here. I do not want to harm the citizens of Georgia who are doing this work. And so instead, we calling on folks to invest in the work on the ground. So it's what she's talking about is Brian camp, being contemptuous and saying, he doesn't care, what do you make of this argument that it doesn't matter if the elites from Hollywood go away? Well, look, first of all, and he didn't fact try to poke them. Even more by calling them. See list actors in Hollywood producers, and so forth. Now, this is a man. That's a head of state. That is invested over four billion dollars in this industry. Through tax credits alone over ten years, and it's provided ninety two thousand jobs to Georgians. He's put that all at risk, because he wants to politically engage in a war with Hollywood, because he thinks it's advantageous to him. So we need to remember that. This is a waste of our tax payer dollars to the tune of at least four billion dollars. This is political malpractice. Todd wrestler, who's one of the owners of the hawk said just yesterday, nobody would run a state like this and put the livelihood of Georgians and the investment at risk. But we need to remember that we all enjoy a free market here in Georgia and across the country, and that means that businesses can be repulsed by an offended by the violation of basic human rights and women reproductive rights are indeed, basic human rights. And so, when that happens, the businesses have choice, the choice to leave women may not. Have choice in Georgia, but the businesses have choice to leave, and that's what's happening. And so we know that the Republicans here, the Republican leadership here, there anti-business. They've declared tariffs on our farmers, tear force on our auto industry. Remember the gun more, they had with Delta Airlines just this time last year. And now we see that they're declaring war on women, and the film industry that we've invested in for over ten years now. So Republicans are anti women in Georgia, and they're also anti-business on, on the Republican side. They seem to think that this is a winning issue that they can then culture war over Georgia, even though Georgia is Stacey Abrams, a lot of people believe, but for voter suppression and shenanigans by the current governor she'd be governor. So it's a state, that's teetering on the brink of being a purple state, but this is Lou Dobbs on the Trump side of things. And this is what he said about this. Potential Disney boycott. And most assuredly, if I end Saran does carry out their threats retaliation from the other side, we'll follow and it will escalate to the disadvantage and destruction of all, so is where we're going mutually shared destruction where the Hollywood business maybe backs out of Georgia, you already hear about people not wanting to send their children college admissions in the state are down because a lot of people do not want to send their daughter actually just got a text refrain. Is that no way our daughter is going to school? It places like Emory. No way. So if that is already happening, you're going to have an economic hit to Georgia while on the right. There's good bring it on. We'll have a culture war. Yeah. I'm not sure how it's gonna play out. I do think it's most likely in this case, that unless the supreme court steps in and says we're going to allow these what are called, heartbeat bills that, that ban abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, a time when many women don't even realize yet that they are pregnant. That you won't have the studios pull out because I think they've all said that they're not gonna pull out unless the courts uphold this. So right now, it is pasta. I'm not sure the Republicans should be so confident that this is a winning political issue, Roe v. Wade, which extended out twenty two weeks or further is still very popular by the majority of from the majority of Americans. These bills are, are quite extreme really, really amounts to effectively, a ban since most women won't be able to even have the knowledge mental time to have an abortion with these things. And then you have even more extreme versions of this playing out in Alabama, and elsewhere, where there's no exceptions for, for rape, or, or incest. But I think it's really cavenaugh. They kicked us off the states are now they're energized, the pro-life forces are energized. And that's why you're saying this. And then to that very point to you're running Senate United States, Senate campaign, how much of that conversation has become about the supreme court because Democrats don't tend to vote on the court, but who controls the Senate controls who gets on the supreme court. And you've heard Mitch McConnell, make it very clear. He doesn't even believe democratic presidents, even if one is elected have the right to put me on the court, he figures, he's going to stack them with more Kavanagh's. Well at this point joy, the conversations almost entirely about this because it's frankly, it's more than just the concept of the supreme court. I mean this law, particularly the one in Georgia. And, and now eleven other states relegates pregnant women to be vessels of the state, requiring them to carry pregnancies to term after a certain point. It also means that they're incompetent to declare their own medical decisions, and that's just repugnant to so many people. But let me tell you what's going on here. This is exactly not kind of exactly the same thing that happened in two thousand fourteen when Republican strategists declared. The anti gay marriage amendment would be put on various state ballots. So that it would Jen up their base to come out and help struggling George W Bush, get reelected doing it here in two thousand four. They're doing the same thing here now for two thousand and twenty they wanna gin their base. They're using women as pawns in this game. And that's exactly what's going on there. Trying to get Trump reelected, and Republicans reelected, when they know they have no record to run on tariff wars horrible budget situation and so forth. That's what's going on its Republican strategy Ginette, their base, and people that do such a cynical thing. Don't deserve to be an office. At least Democrats at least for one. No. It's happening because right in two thousand four they just barreled across. They were able to drag W Bush across the finish line. In lost the popular vote by five hundred forty thousand votes, right. The first time in two thousand sorry he did win the, the second have them do. It helped him do it being played. And we can't be played yet. Theresa tomlinson. Thank you very much. Judd leg muscle have you on again, and coming up Trump's anti-immigration zealotry is about to hit you in the wallet. You will explain next. Police in Virginia Beach have yet to reveal a motive behind last night's mass shooting at municipal building and briefing this morning. Officials focused not on the shooter, but on the twelve victims. Brown. Works in public works for over four and a half years and is a right of way agent. And she is a resident of Chesapeake Virginia. Terrel Welsh scholar, who works in public works for over six years and serves as an engineer, and is a resident of Virginia Beach. Mary Louise, gale. Who has worked in public works for over twenty four years and serves as a right of wage it, and is the resident of Virginia Beach. Alexander Mikhail Gustaf has worked for over nine years in public works, and is a right of way agent and is a resident of Virginia Beach. Katherine a Nixon who serves in public utilities for over two years, ten years as an engineer, and is a resident of Virginia Beach. Richard, h nettleton rich worked in public utilities for over twenty eight years served as an engineer served with me as Lieutenant and Germany in the one thirty th engineer brigade and was the resident of no. Christopher Kelly rap. Served in public works for just eleven months as an engineer and is a citizen power ten. Ryan Keith Cox, who served in public utilities for over twelve and a half years and is an account clerk, and a resident of Virginia Beach. Joshua a party who served in public utilities for four and a half years as an engineering technician, and is a resident of Virginia Beach. Michelle Missy Langer, who served in public utilities for twelve years as an administrative assistant, and as a resident of Virginia Beach. Robert, Bobby Williams, who served in public utilities for over forty one years as a special projects coordinator, and is a resident of Chesapeake. Herbert Bert snowing who was a contractor trying to fill a permit. And is it resident of Virginia Beach? Why raise American consumers prices on all of that stuff coming from Mexico? So this is one of the most misunderstood aspects of the Trump cares. The government of China has borne the burden of those terrorists in the form of lower tax revenues and a low rated growth. So we've exit cone simmer but no pay for it. No, the government of China and Mexico will pay for it. And the producers in Mexico and China pay for this use people who say that somehow American consumers are going to pay for this. It's simply not true. Yeah, but sorry. Because that was just not true was talking to the person in my ear because that was completely not true. Everything that you just heard there, Trump traded visor Peter Navarro apparently really does not fundamentally understand well trade this week, Trump threatened to impose escalating tariffs on Mexico, unless the country, somehow stops migration into the United States, and according to sources close to the White House. The mastermind behind the immigration tariffs, was none other than Stephen Miller, of course while the Treasury Secretary in the US trade representative's, both oppose the plant, but who listens to them. Join me. I'm Marie tracer Kamar CEO voter Latino David Johnston, author of it's even worse than you think David, I'm not an economist David Johnson. But even I know that terror attacks fame by the consumer. They're the idea that the person who's in charge of trade is pretending that the country of Mexico pays the tariffs that Donald Trump just impose on us. What do you make of the fact that he's lying about that? We generally doesn't know which is well, this is a good example of what one of my children said. Years ago. Happy go magic LAN just make things up. Certainly, if the Chinese government has a reduction in what they're selling to us that has an impact, but he's completely totally misleading the American public in everybody else's pay. Can you just explain? What just give us a very quick fundamentals, if Donald Trump levies tariffs on Mexico to punish them for somehow, not, stopping you migration what will happen. Well tariffs are essentially a measure that discourages you from buying a foreign made product or food or other item and buying a domestic one, and it also means domestic producers can increase their prices up to almost the level of the importers price, plus the tariff, and it is an important element in economic development for countries that are developing, like we were say, in the eighteen hundreds, but it's a tax on you. And here's one of the reasons it's particularly horrible. We have these supply. Chains. We make parts in the United States for cars, we send them to Mexico to assemble them, which is a very low value out of the enterprise. And then we bring the cars back to the United States and to disrupt these supply chains is to disrupt American workers jobs. Yeah. And you know, and in, in states that are important to I said, there's a piece of NBC news put out about what states are going to be impacted by this that border state. Arizona gets about forty percent. Forty percent of its imports from Mexico. The highest hear of any state about thirty eight percent of Michigan's imported product come from Mexico, lie that car parts that thirty five percent of Texas imports are from our seventy mix. It was our largest trading partner punishing them. Economically punishes states, Donald would probably like to get reelected, what sense does this make in your mind? Is this is this literally just racial policy being litigated by people who don't understand economics? Now they understand full disclosure before Voto Latino, I actually did trade international trade agreements on the hill. So I'm somewhat familiar with what they're doing and basic. Kley what Donald Trump is. He's basically rolling the dice. This has very little to do with Mexico and immigrants as everything to basically go toe-to-toe with the fed chair Powell saying, I want you to decrease in interest rates interest rates so that I can get reelected, so that people can start buying homes again, but the problem is that by basically making us incredibly vulnerable to recessions. Because if we were to hit a recession joy, we couldn't lower interest rate, sending more, and we couldn't lower taxes anymore, but it's a short term strategy for him to get reelected. But the problem is what happens. Not only Americans bear, the brunt of all of this. When you have Costco, CEO saying, hey, we actually provide some of the lowest prices in the world. We're not going to be able to do that under these these scenarios here also sending a signal to our international trade partners saying you cannot trust Americans when it comes to trade agreements. What's happening right now, for example, with China? China's said, okay, you're not going to buy our soybeans. You know who will we can't soybeans re you know, who will the Brazilians now the? Brasilia's are incredibly happy about that when we always send remove the tears from the Chinese, do you think the Chinese are going to say, okay, we're going to go back and buy soybeans, you'd better believe, not that basically, it's a hostile trading environment? And at the end of the day, these states that you mentioned are going to be incredibly vulnerable. But again he is trying to play the short game trying to decrease interest rates and trying to decrease a task the tax base which already has done. So it's about it's up to the American people to say, we're not going to be hoodwinked. We're going to be very very steady. And we're gonna make sure that you actually are protecting the farmers that you're protecting our auto industries, and they have to fight back and, you know, the thing about Donald Trump and you would understand this having covered for so long. David Johnson is that he has this obsession with China and obsession with Mexico being, these foreign bed actors these scary people that his base wants him to fight, and so you've got this, this, this policy emerging, not from his economic shop. But from his the Brown people out of America. Shop Stephen Miller Shaw. And so in order to appease. His voters mainly care about immigration more than anything else, and the shift in the demographic balance of the United States. That's what they care about what they vote on, does it. Is it in Donald Trump's nature literally undermined the farm economy, and the import export economy just to appease those people, and himself, I guess, the only joy the only mantles matters to Donald Trump is Donald Trump his policies aren't America, first, Trump, I and he's hoping to hoodwink all those people who wanna live in some mythical, nineteen fifties, white America, where black people didn't have any real civil rights and Asian people were hardly ever seen. If you didn't live in California, and that's clearly this is racism mixed with eighteenth, century mercantilist economics because Donald Trump's assumption is there's only X amount of wealth in the world. And every dollar Donald Trump doesn't have or America doesn't have is a dollar. Somebody else has. That's not how economics works. We actually know how to create wealth. We're really good at it. But if you're a Griff twer Trump then no you don't understand that. And all of these policies are, in fact, indeed, a bet can. Donald Trump manipulate this economy, and get himself, a second term, he could lose the popular vote by twelve million votes. It's still get a second term if he wins the electoral college. Yeah. And merchants with what fortuitous booking kinda know everything. I think you'd actually know. Everything can you just give in very quickly system? What will this mean the impact economically for? Let's say a farmer or seventy who works auto industry. What does this actually going to do to them? Well, right now, temporarily the farmers are getting a bail out from congress. So Brazilian vice. Right. But the auto industry is not and the auto industry. Sadly is the one has strongly struggled through the last fifteen years. So he actually has to come up with a different type of policy like, how do you actually make them go back to work in a different sector? But let's be honest, one of the major reasons that we're seeing such migration from Central America is climate change. If Donald Trump had any curiosity of reviving, our economy, he should really be talking about how do we start investing in renewable energies so that we actually stopped the migration from the root cause? Climate change is like a fairy tale. It's not real, there's money to be made for folks that I just came back from Greenland, I know where Raby back from, Greenland, if the Arctic thaws all of a sudden, the Russians have navigational rights for the very first time to, to the oceans, and there's money to made by exploiting minerals, and oil house shocking that something Donald Trump wants. Russia out shocking Maria coup David, it's like a unified theory of Trump. Advocate johnson. Thank you guys very much. Excellent segment coming up. Altering the senses for racism, that's next. We will also examine check with Jerry Ross's decision to add a new citizenship question after experts listen up and to sensors Vero warned and I, quote that it harms the quality of the census count. Let that sink in. That's what accidents toll secretary Ross, the Trump administration's decision to add a citizenship question to the twenty twenty cents is under even more scrutiny after files found on the hard drive of a late Republican strategist revealed that adding a citizenship question was designed specifically to give Republicans and white voters electoral advantage. Join out, Rashad Robinson president of color of change. So this was a revelation not surprising, but surprising that this person actually wrote it down. Yes, the pricing that it was written down, and that it came out. But like most of this sort of conspiracy theories that we see the right, we can't be surprised. We can't be surprised when we see mass shootings and we see what they're doing with the NRA. We can't be surprised when we see the attacks on women's right to choose. But at the same time, the question is are reaction to it. Do we allow this news? To just be another thing that we get outraged about, or do we use this moment to do the type? Of mobilization that one does when someone tries to come in your house, and steal something because that is exactly what's happening. This attempt is to steal things from us. It's to steal food out of poor kids mouths. It's about stealing representation from communities who need it. It's about stealing Medicaid and Medicare access to people who need it, the most in communities. This attempt to steal the resources from our community has to be met with the type of outrage and mobilization that this demand and just to give the data here, this an estimate that sixty six point five million people will not respond if a citizenship question is added to the to the census, as you said, that would reduce a portion meant in terms of congressional invest in congressional redistricting and it would also reduce the actual resources the monetary sources there's also UCLA study says up to ten percent of the population would likely not respond to Denver, this would really hurt. And we already have problems with undercounts back in two thousand and ten. When the census was funded at scale, and there were also. Oh, it's attempts by the Obama administration to really get all sort of enumerators of color into communities, counting vote. There was an undercount of two million children. And so what that means right for head, skipped headstart access what that means for school lunches then out of that to billions of disproportionate number of children of color. And so what we understand is that even in the best of times or invest of circumstances. They were undercount in terms of communities, that are hard to reach communities, urban communities, and so now we have an administration that's doing everything possible to make it hard not to mention just the fact that, like some may feel concerned about, you know, filling out the sentence government worker, exactly and so September thirtieth for people who are watching is the key date that we have to mobilize to. And so September thirtieth is the day when the congress makes it decision about appropriations, and we need eight two billion dollars or more appropriate to fully. Fund this centers, so that we can have the type of outreach in communities, that's going to make the census have the type of counting and scale necessary, a couple of things we don't we know that this activist, was, essentially making the conspiracy theory argument that Democrats inflate the numbers of people of color because of unlawful migration that undocumented immigrants get counted, which they think is wrong the sentences. Everybody should be counted. Everyone physically here and their argument is in order that only citizens should be counted. And so they're really trying to make an argument. That's conspiratorial. The Democrats are inflating the numbers of people of color, and there is a fear that, that is changing the demographics. That's what's behind this. Everyone actually does need to be counted because if people are here, those numbers, actually need to be counted for all sorts of things, whether people are documented undocumented, the constitution says that. Villes numbers. Don't then if people are undocumented. Don't actually then go into apportionment or into actual like the counting of congressional district. But that does go into how we think about sort of what type of resources. What's the planning for roads for schools for other things that communities need if people are actually physically here? We need to understand that. And so they're still counting people through that citizens have question if people check off that they're not citizens. They check up. They're not. They're still they're still counting confidence supreme court is going to, because Dr Robert has not really been great on voting rights. I mean, they're no. We are not count. We are not confident all and this is why we need to make sure that congress does the NFL respond. People went out to the polls to elect a new house, and what we Mitch McConnell. Can't shut that I know. And he can he can shut it down on his end. But the Democrats in the house need to use all of their power to hold a countable. What's happening? You have heard this democrat shod, Robin call. We're gonna we want to talk more. I wanna talk about when they see. Which is an incredible documentary color of change did a screening last night was amazing at Schaumburg. We'll, we'll talk about that shot Robinson. Thank you after the break. That's our show for today, Sita MARTINI each. Hi, it's Stephanie rule, if you love them as NBC where your heart on your sleeve gear up with t shirts hoodies hats and more from Belgian rule, and all of your favorite MSNBC shows at MSNBC store dot com.

Donald Trump president Nancy Pelosi congress Trump President Clinton United States Senate Donald Trump Muller Richard Nixon Robert Muller Mitch McConnell David congressman Clyburn Elizabeth Warren Al Gore attorney
#EERS S8 Ep198: The IG Report is a Mixed Bag

The Erick Erickson Show

2:04:28 hr | 1 year ago

#EERS S8 Ep198: The IG Report is a Mixed Bag

"L. O. and welcome it. Is Eric Erickson here. The Erik Erikson show across the state of Georgia. The phone number eight seven seven nine seven Eric. Eight seven seven nine nine seven three seven four to five. Well we have the Horowitz report. Four A for over a year now. People on the right in particular have been treating everybody in politics these days once over bullet LE. Let me let me start at that premise. Everyone in politics wants a silver bullet to take out the other side instead. Head of debating the other side coming up with Paul Public Policy Trying to persuade voters across the board. I'm trying to use the word holistically. It's such a pretentious word but trying to persuade voters across the political aisle that they're right on on issues building a platform around which People people can rally instead Bo side. You're trying to find silver bullets. During the Obama Era Republicans constantly tried to find that one silver bullet often named John Roberts who was going to take out obamacare or there was going to be a magical mysterious birth certificate that would undermine Barack Obama's claims to the presidency or war There was going to be some scandal somewhere. Never mind that the press was protecting him and on and on it went in and then the Democrats do the exact same thing with Donald Trump Muller was going to be this overboard Adam Schiff was gonna be. The silver bullet impeachment was going to be the silver bullet Anonymous was going to be the silver bullet. Hey there was going to be that one thing just that one thing that was going to wipe out. Donald Trump silver bullets are as has mythological. is where wolves I mean. You can make a silver bullet but it's not going to take out your bad guy It's not going to take out your wolf in it. Just the whole the thing is silly. Well the the right has in its own fever swamps over the last couple of years. I can't tell you the number of friends of mine. WHO said Horowitz? What's report the Horowitz? report the Horowitz. Were I had friends who have become detail experts. On what the Horowitz report was going to contain before the Horowitz report ever came out out before the inspector general ever released his report. I had friends who could tell you. Detailed stuff and inconceivably within ten minutes of the Horowitz report being released it was over four hundred pages long and friends of mine had had their detail diagnostic of exactly what it said and how everything the Democrats had ever alleged was ever wrong. Well there's a lot for boost sides to cherry pick out of it overall. What we have is a report that should in fact be troubling to both sides of the aisle there are a lot of conspiracy theories debunked by the DOJ report and? There are a lot of things that people should should be troubled by about the FBI's behavior I it IT'S A. I don't trust though a number of the reporters out there who are covering in it any more than I trust partisans who were covering it mean. For example. I think some of the political reporters have been deeply deeply troubling in how they have approached the situation with the Everything related to the the president and national security and I. I think that that is a fair statement. I think that reporters and number of media outlets could do a much better job and I bring up the politico though because I do actually think that there has been some pretty good coverage. Bridge at politico. On the Horowitz report. And what it said or did not say how it covered things and what it did in fact While there's a lot of debunking of the Horowitz report by a the A lot of debunking of of right wing mythology by the uh-huh by the press and Horwitz report There is in fact deeply troubling Data within the Horowitz report related to the behavior of the FBI. This is not a report that the Democrats should be rallying around as proof of how terrible the president is they can say it debunked claims because it does there are a number of right wing claims that are debunked in this several things. The president has claimed including that the Obama campaign tried to embed someone within his campaign Thoroughly debunked by Horowitz. It's a lot of stuff on the fights application Christopher Steele debunked but there's some serious trouble for the FBI. I mean let me before I get into even and how the mainstream media is cover this not exactly fans of the trump administration. Let me give you some of the detailed reporting from Josh Gerstein Politico who I think actually does a far better Effort at covering the broad scope of this report than some of his colleagues at politico. Who We've been so emotionally invested in getting the president they they're just giddy that some of the president's claims have been debunked and they're not paying attention to some of the underlying underlying in seriousness of what the inspectors found So let me read you. These couple of paragraphs here a highly anticipated Justice Department review of the origins of the federal investigation into potential collusion between the trump campaign and Russia foul no direct evidence of political bias in launching the probe but identified an embarrassing slew of inaccuracies accuracy and omissions by the FBI that marred requests for quartered surveillance of a former trump campaign advisor the report from the Inspector General Michael Horowitz wits foul also revealed for the first time the FBI used a confidential source to approach an unidentified high-level trump up campaign official in September two thousand sixteen who is never the subject of the investigation. The approach revealed nothing of value to the probe Horowitz's review did not find any indication the FBI planted anyone in the campaign as president trump claimed but it did did does bolster that campaign officials were repeatedly the focus of outreach. By confidential human sources seeking to establish whether the campaign was colluding with Russia. The report finds those tactics complied with existing FBI policy but the review contains withering criticism of the Preeminent Law Enforcement Agency for basic fundamental in series errors. Handling the surveillance application for Carter page. We are deeply concerned that so many basic fundamental errors were made by three separate hand picked investigative teams on one of the most sensitive FBI investigations after the matter had been briefed to the highest levels within the FBI. Even though the information sought through the use of Faiza Authority related so closely to an ongoing presidential campaign and even though those involved with the investigation knew that their actions were likely to be subject to close scrutiny. We believe the circumstances were circumstance reflects a failure not just but what by those who prepared the FIS applications but also by the managers and supervisors in the crossfire hurricane chain of command including FBI senior officials who were briefed as the investigation progressed. The Attorney General is endorsing the Inspector General's critique of the FBI handling of the surveillance process. But he does say that Horowitz's missing data on the predicate to launch the investigation. There is now a separate separate investigation if you'll recall Bill Bar the attorney general has appointed a highly respected. US Attorney from Connecticut. John Durham to be a federal prosecutor to investigate other aspects of how the Russia probe began weirded. Begin and John. Durham signaling is. This is his statement and again Democrats and Republicans alike. Respect John Durham and he says our investigation has included developing information from other persons and entities. Both in the US and out of the US based on the evidence collected to date and while our investigation is ongoing. Last month we advise the Inspector General. We do not agree with some of the reports conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened. That is pretty significant. Coming John. Durham here's the problem. Though is trump supporters are now moving goalposts. They they had they had planted their flag on a host of claims that have been debunked by the inspector general and so now they picked up the goalpost of their pay. No attention although stuff look John. Durham is still doing an investigation. Now we gotta wait for. It was always wait for her. which wait for which? Way Horowitz in the run-up to the report yesterday a lot of conservatives aid to today Horowitz is going to come out and undermine all the claims of the Democrats and everything they made an show. What does this was a partisan affair? Well in some cases he didn't in some cases he showed. FBI agents baby very badly but he showed that they did not use the steele dossier. It opened the Russia. Probe he showed Peter Strauss Lisa page where not decision makers these Carter page was the only trump official under surveillance The first quarter page Faiza did contain inaccuracies. In omissions. Steel did was dropped as an F. B. I. source he had a prior relationship with Evonne Khadr up and it turns out. Paul Manafort was under investigation prior to scrutiny in the Russia. Probe those are the things they found. Horowitz faulted that investigators for this is from a different Politico Story Horowitz faulted investigators various aspects of their use of the so-called steele dossier. YEA including relying too heavily on it for warrants for surveillance applications when concerns had been raised about its validity in its source of funding but Horowitz refuted the claims propagated by trump that the Russia investigation had its roots in the dossier the FBI began its investigation of the July. Two Thousands Sixteen based on a tip it received days before about a trump campaign advisor. George Popadopoulos from a foreign ally That would be the Australian ambassador if you recall. And that's part of the Durham investigation now. Apparently while steals reporting for what became the dossier began prior to the opening of the Russia. Probe Horowitz founded the team of investigators. FBI did not become aware of steals reporting until weeks after the investigation began concluded. The dossier played no role. All in the opening. Neither did Lisa Page nor Peter Struck. It turns out that there was never a wiretap of trump tower or the trump campaign pain the FBI did not play it. Spies in the trump campaign and there was Josef Mifsud was not an an FBI informant one. One of the theories put out by some people close to the trump campaign was that there's a professor named Joseph Missile. He's a Russian proxy who informed trump campaign aide George popadopoulos about the Kremlin dirt The interaction set off a series of events that began the Russia. PROBE IT turns out that The Guy was not in league with the FBI. Those are some of the claims sorted boarded but The Democrats are seizing on all of those debunked claims and they're ignoring a lot of the behavior of the FBI that we should be troubled troubled about when it comes to civil rights and how they conduct investigations. Here's Jake Tapper from CNN. But the report of course also outlined some very significant errors errors made by FBI officials. That's right there. were seventeen total instances in which they were substantial inaccuracies cruces or emissions that were left out of these FIS applications these are surveillance warrants that we're targeting Carter page who As we mentioned was a an adviser Sir for the campaign According to Horowitz seventeen such instances in which things were left out or just plainly inaccurate and these were four different warns Jake were were got approval from a court and in each case the FBI simply failed to update the information for for the judges that we're reviewing these Warren's failed updated updated version. Here's James Call Me. Do you think had that in mind today. We need knowledge. The mistakes talked about taking steps to fix a FIS program which also in the report appears to have some serious ask serious weaknesses I think so I mean the report found lots of mistakes. That's really significant. Really unfortunate. But that's why do I g reports and so that's good that he's jumped on that and here is what Ray said Christopher Ray the FBI director plus the biggest takeaway and the most important takeaway from the report for you. Well I think there's a number of takeaways that are important. One that we fully cooperated with this independent review to we fully accept its findings and recommendations nations Pre that the inspector general did not find political bias for improper motivations impacting the opening running of the investigation or the decision to use certain investigative tools during investigations including including Pfizer. But that the Inspector Inspector General did find A number of instances were employees either failed to follow our policies neglected to exercise exercise appropriate diligence or in some other way fell short of the standard of conduct and performance that we that I as director expect of all of of our employees but again we are I am ordering forty over forty corrective actions to address all those things in way too robust and serious And we're determined to learn the lessons from this report and make sure the FBI emerges from this even better and stronger they're going to need to to The FBI has undermined its own credibility on the right because of its handling of this and now the inspector general has come out and you bet mainstream media sources pointing out. They really did screw up a lot. Pete Williams is on on NBC and MSNBC One of the best reporters in the business business when it comes to this stuff He genuinely is a well respected reporter on the right and the left listened to what Pete Williams says in his summation of the report says the FBI basically repeatedly screwed up at every level failing to pay enough attention to potential problems with steel failing to tell the Justice Department and it says at one point that the FBI decided to seek this biza warrant even at the risk of being criticized for doing it later because the report says FBI FBI officials they had said they had to get to the bottom of a potentially serious threat to national security. But the inspector general report says the FIS application was in many ways inaccurate. Incomplete or unsupported it says for example that the FBI failed to look at Some problems he's in steals past work but that was never sufficiently addressed a lot of what Republicans claim would come out. In the Horowitz. report did not come out. Many of their theories were debunked by horwitz but their underlying presupposition turned out to be right. And I think that's significant. The underlying presupposition is that The steele dossier prepared by democratic partisans to undermine president president trump was used by the FBI was discredited the FBI agents did not update the court as to how it had been and discredited even after they stopped relying on it and Christopher Steele and either was a polluting of Democratic Thought Processes Z's Democrat Party Democratic Party thought processes within the FBI. There were partisans there who were moving fast to undermine the president part of that was They really did believe. The president was a Russian agent. Part of that was they. Were moving fast. Part of that was they were working through multiple multiple different groups in multiple different channels. And they weren't talking to each other but there's something else here too and something. We need to be concerned about overall. And that is is The behavior of everyone when it comes to pointing fingers at the FBI the FBI pointing fingers. Everyone else who do you believe. Even who do you trust now. Looks like the Horowitz. Report has a lot for everybody to digest happening now with the Democrats are announcing the impeachment of the president. So let me reroute my audio here. So we can hear the speaker of the House making history. It calls at the first order of business for members of Congress. Congress is the solemn apt to take an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the United States respect respect and gratitude that I thank the chairs of the committees. The six committees have been working to help us honor our oath of office. I also want to thank the staff of those committees and the committee members for all of their work over this period of time to help us protect attack and defense. Thank the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Mr Naylor Chair of the Intelligence Committee Mr Schiff the chair of the ways and Means Committee chairman all these chairman Chairman Routine Neil of Massachusetts cheer the Foreign Enhance Committee. Yeah Yeah Okay Okay okay. She's going to go through all the thinking in process. This happened a short time ago. It does appear and they they essentially there are going to be no Questions for Adam Schiff and they are going to go forward with two articles of impeachment. And let's see if I can pull up the Adam Schiff audio here. Yeah thank you Madam Speaker and to my colleagues good morning. The framers of the Constitution recognized that someday president might come to office this who would abuse that office betray the public trust and undermine national security to secure for help in his reelection and who would seek to abrogate the power of Congress to hold him accountable they recognized this danger and they prescribe a remedy and that remedy is impeachment. It is an extraordinary remedy and one that I've been reluctant to recommend the president. Trump gave Congress no alternative. You've we stand here today. Because the president's continuing abuse of his power has left us no choice to do nothing would make ourselves complicit said in the president's abuse of his office the Public Trust and our national security. The presence misconduct is as simple and as terrible bull as this president trump solicited. We'll we'll get into more of this when we come back. But needless say the Democrats have decided to impeach the president. Two articles of impeachment bribery is not one of them contrary to the talking points and claims of the Democrats and nothing about the concentration camps. I thought they were serious about about that. One we'll get into this when we come back I gotta say it. It really is remarkable that e after months of telling us the president was running concentration camps The Democrats have not included that in their articles of impeachment. Peter Dow is a I mean he is in the Hillary Clinton Colt. I mean this guy is is absurdly partisan in favor of Hillary Clinton more than anyone else Let me let me read you. This tweet Torturing children no impeachment richman inciting anti media violence no impeachment stoking Nazi terrorism. No impeachment entire more report. No impeachment violating emoluments clause no impeachment threatening political opponents. No impeachment shame on you din leaders. Someone clearly believed the docking talking points. never believed the talking points people on either side never believe the talking points. Think for yourself all right Jerry. Nadler and Adam Schiff have spoken. Look in there. They're coming out with their articles of impeachment. Let's listen first to Jerry. Nadler Mr Nathan. Thank you Madam. Speaker over the last several months. Investigative Committees of the House have been been engaged in an impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump's efforts to solicit foreign interference in the two thousand twenty elections efforts. That compromise compromised our national security and threatened the integrity of our elections throughout this inquiry. He has attempted to conceal the evidence from from Congress. And from the American people. Our president holds the ultimate public trust when he betrays that trust and puts himself himself before country. He endangers the constitution. He endangers our democracy and the endangers our national security the framers of the constitution prescribed clear remedy for presidents who so violate their oath of office. That is the power of impeachment today in service to our duty to the constitution and to our country the House Committee on the judiciaries introducing articles of impeachment charging the President of the United States Donald J trump with committing. High crimes and misdemeanors misdemeanors. The first article is for abuse of power. It is an impeachable offense for the president to exercise the powers of his public office to obtain an improper personal benefit while ignoring or in injuring the national interest. I that is exactly what President Trump did when he solicited and pressured Ukraine to interfere in our two thousand twenty presidential presidential election thus damaging our national security undermining the integrity of the next election and violating his oath to to the American people. These accidents moreover are consistent with president trump's previous invitations of foreign interference in two thousand thousand sixteen presidential election notice perpetuating the mythology that the president had something to do with Russia. Here's Adam Schiff as well With with some of his claims to act with such urgency. Today let me fast forward here. The evidence of the presence of his conduct is overwhelming and uncontested. And how could it not be when the president's own words on July twenty fifth. I would like you to do us a favor though lays so bear. His intentions is willing to sacrifice the national security for his own personal interests and when the president got caught he committed his second impeachable act obstruction of Congress of the very ability to make sure that no one is above the law. Not even the president of the United States. The evidence is every bit as strong that President Trump has obstructed congress fully without precedent and without basis in law. If allowed to stand it would decimate Congress's ability to conduct oversight of this president or any other in the future leaving this president and those who follow to be free to be as corrupt malfeasance or incompetent as they would like with no prospect of discovery or accountability ability. Now some would argue. Why don't you just wait? Why don't you just wait until you get these witnesses? The White House refuses to produce. Why don't you just wait until you get the documents? The White House refuses to turn over and people should understand what that argument really means. It has taken US eight months to get a lower court ruling that Don mcgann has no absolute right to defy congress. Eight months for one court decision if it takes US another eight months to get a second court or maybe a Supreme Court decision people need to understand stand that is not the end of the process. It comes back to us and we ask questions because he no longer has absolute immunity and then he claims something something else that his answers are privileged and we have to go to back to court for another eight or sixteen months the argument. Why don't you just wait? Amounts I just this. Why don't you just let him cheat in one more election? Why not let him cheat just one more time? Why not let him have Ford help? Just one more time you know. I need to stop this there. and point out We have the Miller or report. Didn't happen that didn't happen. They're impeaching the president over mythology. That's what's going on here. They're impeaching the president over a mythology. The president and of the United States has done what he asked Ukraine to look into the crowd strike stuff from two two thousand sixteen and check out the Biden allegations that he believed had been dropped for political influence the Ukrainians did none of that. The President God no help he got no help. From the Russians in two thousand sixteen the Russians tried to undermine the election generally and yet here is the chairman the House Intelligence Committee claiming that the President Cheated in twenty sixteen. That's what this is about. That's what this is about about. The Democrats are still mad about the two thousand sixteen election. They're not mad about the president's behavior. They're not mad about the Ukraine Phone Kohl. They're not mad about what the president said an office. They're mad that he won shift has just given the game away. That's that's really profound that the Democrats are essentially. They really are listen. I would much prefer a president pence to president trump. I I'm not opposed was to if they find something impeaching the president but what Adam Schiff is saying here is is he just wants to undermine the election from two thousand sixteen he he calls in doubt he believes the Russians sold for the president. And I'm sorry that that stealing the election. That's taking the election away from the American people who who who did an election. There's no evidence that the Russians were ever able to steal the election. There's no evidence that that their money on facebook was able to actually persuade people to change their votes. There's there's no evidence. They hacked the election machines and stole votes. What there is is a candidate on the democratic side who sucked as a candidate didn't go to three key swing states that she should have gone to and she lost them and president trump one? Now you can disliked the president. I don't particularly care for the guy on a lot of stuff but for Adam Schiff to come out and say the president cheated in two thousand sixteen. The mold report debunked that the molar report said. It's not true. The report said there was no indication of the Russians. Colluding with the trump campaign. The Horowitz report came out yesterday and and said the same thing that the trump team and the Russians were not collaborating together and yet the Democrats now are rushing. She now the gate to impeach the president of the United States. They have failed to make a bipartisan effort to do so they haven't of it convinced any Republicans to come on board and now they're saying this is about twenty sixteen it's not about. It's not about Ukraine. It's about two thousand sixteen. It's about believing the president cheated. I don't think the president and should have done what he did with Ukraine. I think it was wrong. But then I think tariffs are wrong. I think the president's behavior online is wrong. I think a lot of the president's angry tweets are wrong but just because something is wrong does not mean it's impeachable we've lost the ability to nuance distinguish in the country. Wrong does not mean impeachable It means I disagree with him. I think it was bad. I think you should have done something else. But wrong is not impeachable and while the Democrats are saying here is essentially. They don't like the president's behavior and they don't like what the president has done in Ukraine. And they think that the president cheated and in two thousand sixteen and they want to stop him from cheating beating in two thousand twenty th they think he cheated for one court decision if it takes us another eight months to get a second court or maybe a supreme cream court decision people need to understand that is not the end of the process. It comes back to us and we ask questions because he no longer has absolute immunity mm unity and then he claims something else that his answers are privileged and we have to go to back to court for another eight or sixteen months the argument. Why why don't you just wait amounts to this? Why don't you just let him cheat in one more election? Why not let him cheat just one more time? Why not let him have Ford help just one more time? All of that was was debunked by the Miller report. Do we need to read back through the Miller report. Do we need to because is it's there in the mole report that the campaign did not get foreign help from the Russians. It's they're in the Miller report. That were the Democrats have claimed wasn't true. It's they're in the molar report that the Russians wanted to systematically undermine our election and have each other in the United States at each other's throat they've succeeded exceeded beyond their wildest dreams in that but the president didn't Cheat Hillary Clinton sucked. There's a difference in the Democrats don't don't seem to understand it. And that is deeply problematic for where we had as a country next on his news and conservative. You never separated from the true. It's the Erik. Erikson John Show. Hello there it is Eric Erickson here the irks and show across the state of Georgia the phone number. If you want to be part of the program eight seven seven nine seven the Eric. Eight seven seven nine seven three seven four to five I feel like Given what has happened in Washington today with the With the impeachment We we should use the CNN. Montage that gavel coming down. I'm Jake Tapper in Washington and you're watching watching special coverage of this historic day. This is a historic day here in the nation's capital it will be a historic day ahead. Or you're watching. CNN special live coverage of of what can only be described as historic as this is turning out to be a historic day. A very important another very very important at historic workday a very historic and important AAC another historic day here in Washington historic day. Here in the nation's capital Chris. This is going to be another historic day here in Washington at at the end of long and certainly historic day a truly historic day. It wasn't historic day on Capitol Hill Historic Day with millions watching star historic day on this historic workday. Just getting started on this important historic day. It is a historic day on Capitol Hill historic gay on Capitol Hill impeachment each moment of the president of the United States. They have a problem though. Americans are not sold independence or not sold The Republicans do not sold. There is no bipartisanship Here's Mercedes slap a WHO worked at the White House on with Laura Ingraham last night before the article article scheme but we knew the articles were coming here. We go the Democrats really. Can't see how this is all helping trump. But I can tell you all the messages I was getting from from friends and associates across the country. People are getting they just think the Democrats gas. Oh there's no question and I would I like what are your teeth as media pieces for example and they start saying the dark our they've been talking about the White House in crisis since the president became president. It's the crisis and really it's the Democrat Party and the media. That's in crisis. The Democrats were trying and praying that they could sell all this narrative of impeachment Laura. They have failed dramatically. The American people especially these targeted states. We've seen these polls are basically saying wait a second. Let's get these policy. The issues resolved. Let's get US MCA pass. Jail tax states like Pennsylvania. Impact states like Wisconsin and Michigan as opposed to what we're seeing right now. which is that? They're they're not buying it once. These hearings came came out publicly fell flat. Va So what are we. There you go it. All fell flat the the Democrats. They haven't been able to make a case on impeachment to the American people this so I can't emphasize this as part enough. Republicans were able to get a bipartisan impeachment. Against Bill Clinton Democrats Democrats haven't been able to do that with Donald Trump now. Why Democrats are convinced that nothing they say or do would persuade Republicans Republicans but behind the scenes? They know. That's not true that the public facade of this so much of this is public facade. So here's the thing If the Democrats Democrats lose in twenty twenty two donald trump the media narrative is going to be impeachment. Hurt the Democrats if if Democrats win in two thousand twenty the media narrative will be that actually impeachment was genius and it helped galvanize the American Public Donald Trump. They will write the narrative base on impeachment based on what happens in November of next year. Then the Democrats will spin and the media will gladly accept the spin from the Democrats on this but Republicans were able to make a bipartisan case against Bill Clinton Democrats can't make a bipartisan case. Right now in the big galvanizing issue here is that the Democrats have not offered the Republicans anything. They haven't been willing to to accept any of the Republican witnesses. They haven't been able to accept it either. Revolt glimpse. They haven't been willing to go through the motions to try to even build a bipartisan case. Because because this is all about galvanizing the democratic basis not actually about impeaching the president. They don't have the votes in the Senate to impeach the president and so the Republicans are left to conclude honestly conclude that this has never really been about throwing the president out of office. This has been about mobilizing the democratic base for next year. It looks like this as electioneering not constitutional. It looks like this is about the election. Not The impeachment moment. It looks like the Democrats are so convinced that they've got to do everything to get the presidency. They've been saying we got impeach. The president in order to win in two thousand twenty. It has nothing to do with actually throw him out of office. It has to do with galvanizing the democratic base fundraising off the Democratic Base. Doing all of these things. It's it's not gonNA work publicly the Democrats say there's nothing they can do to persuade Republicans to come along with them privately. They know. Oh that's not true privately. They know they're about two dozen Republicans leaving Congress half of them don't like the president. The ones who are retiring. All they needed was for the Democrats to throw. I'm a bone and they would have come up with something will heard from south. Texas doesn't like the president but he needed more than what the Democrats were willing to offer when they didn't want to go there Adam Schiff saying they would have to fight this out in court. Yeah they'd have to fight it out in court if you get those witnesses but so. They didn't do their due diligence in this impeachment. And so now what's going to happen very. Interestingly is they will go to the Senate and what they want is a trial in the Senate they WANNA spectacle in the United States Senate and what the Democrats are really hoping is that in the United States Senate There will be enough evidence evidence on display that they can undermine the president and that is problematic. I think I think the the Democrats will be sending out fundraising this afternoon. I in fact I'm sure the Democrats will be sending out fundraising efforts this afternoon. But so will the president. The president has a rally plan tonight and Pennsylvania key location is it not Pennsylvania he will go to Pennsylvania he will meet privately lead this afternoon with the Russian Foreign Minister of the White House he will then fly to Pennsylvania for rally. You know the rally will be on Fox News and by the way. There's interesting data out on Fox News that plays plays into this turns out that in two hundred ninety nine of the four hundred Some odd congressional districts out there Fox News is the most watched sh news network. I WANNA spend a little time on this later. But it's deeply deeply relevant to impeachment as everybody fixate S- in seventy per nearly seventy percent of congressional districts Fox News is the most watched news outlet in seventy percent percents congressional districts people. This is from Joanna Pearson's At morning consult people tend to seek out news that reinforces pushes their own ideologies in a news analysis. More than one million responses gathered over the past year suggests the country's much hungry for red meat morning console data from one million one one hundred twenty four thousand three hundred sixty eight responses gathered November first two thousand eighteen through October thirty first. Two thousand nine hundred provides a unique look at weekly viewership of CNN Fox News Msnbc among Democrats Independents and Republicans in every US Congressional district and reveals the awesome reach of one outlet in particular Fox. It's news it is the most watched cable news outlet in two hundred ninety nine of the four hundred thirty six districts by a margin of two percentage points the conservative leading cable giant which launched Nineteen ninety-six has led cable and Total Dave Yours for the last forty months according to Nielsen residents in sixty eighty. Three districts watch nonpartisan. CNN The most by the same margin and Luckily Nimitz NBC's the most watched cable news channel in only one congressional district California's second a Democratic District district that encompasses the state's coast north of San Francisco. That's going to matter. It's going to matter in how impeachment is shaped. It's going to matter in. Why the Democrats doc rats have not been able to build a bipartisan consensus? The the Democrats and this is the key here. This is the important key. The Democrats have convinced themselves that they you can't get a fair hearing on Fox despite the Fox News Day part being very balanced and very fair. They haven't even tried to make a bipartisan case. They're going to fundraise off of it and and it's GonNa undermine them in the coming year really incredible to watch this play out. It's time for me to tell you about my favorite toothbrush. Holiday season is approaching. And you you can get the clip. The quip is actually a great stocking stuffer. It's a great toothbrush. You know I had one of those one hundred dollar Sonic vibrating toothbrushes. And you had to take the charger with you it. It was just it was garbage Didn't like it the brush. It was very small. You could not get the brush head on the toothbrush of the back. Your mouth actually clean The the back of your teeth. The quip quip is designed by designers. Dennis working together. You can totally tell. It's got sensitive. Sonic vibrations and a timer with thirty second pulses to guide your routine You got the quick floss dispenser. It has premark strings you can always use the right amount You got the quick send you a new brush head every three months. They've got a great great great great beat toothbrush and Nell Flossy as well. Just go to get quick dot com slash Erickson to save on gift sets. Get your first brush. Refill pack for free with refill plan. So you get your first brush at refill for free at get Quip Q. U. I. P. Dot Com Slash Erickson get quip dot com slash Erickson. It is a great toothbrush. Is The toothbrush that have been using for multiple years. My wife and child use it as well. I really do recommend quip. I really am user and I was before I started doing this commercial. That's why I really recommended. Get quick. Dot Com hello and welcome it. Is Eric Erickson here. The Erik Erikson show across the state of Georgia. The phone number. If you WANNA be a part of the program Graham today eight seven seven nine seven Eric. Eight seven seven nine seven. Three seven four to five In the words of Wolf Blitzer at CNN historic day. The Democrats have issued articles of impeachment against the President of the United States in part because of the president's president supposed- cheating in the election in twenty sixteen. Which of course he didn't actually do in the Mola report thoroughly debunked but to set the stage here before we take your phone calls? Here's Adam Schiff announcing why they don't want to wait any further further witnesses. Why they don't want courts to get involved volved authorizing witnesses to come for one court decision if it takes us another eight months to get a second court or maybe a Supreme Court decision decision people need to understand that is not the end of the process it comes back to us and we ask questions because he no longer has absolute immunity and then he claims something else that his answers are privileged and we have to go to back to court for another eight or sixteen months the argument? Why don't you just wait amounts to this? Why don't you just let him cheat in one more election? Why not let him cheat just one more time? Why not let him have four help just one more time? That is what that argument for four. Okay so essentially. The Miller report said the trump campaign did not coordinate with the Russians. In Two thousand sixteen. The Russians did want to disrupt corrupt the American electoral process But the trump campaign did not coordinate with them. Here comes Adam shifts say Why don't you just let him cheat one more election one at letting cheat one more time? Why not have foreign help just one more time that presumes then that Adam Schiff believes president trump did cheat in two thousand sixteen eighteen and did coordinate with the Russians? Though the Mueller investigation is clear that he did not the Russians certainly did want undermine the election and by the end of the election certainly wanted to hurt Hillary Clinton and helped Donald Trump But there's no evidence the Russians rigged the election. There's no evidence. They stole the election. There's no evidence that the trump campaign coordinated made with them When there is evidence of Hillary Clinton was a crummy candidate who didn't go to Michigan Pennsylvania? Wisconsin like her husband told her to And lost herself. The election had gone to the state she might have been able to pull it off as so essentially. The Democrats are admitting they are impeaching the president of the United States for mythology from twenty any sixteen. That's that's why they're impeaching him. Doug Collins was on with Fox News here just a few moments ago. I grabbed the audio while we were in commercial mersal period but that's the allegation number two obstruction of Congress. He is not above the law. Says Chairman Nadler back to Doug Collins. You're listening and your reaction now here on the Republican. Yeah well it's it's just amazing. I know but it's very telling that they all walked off stage and didn't answer a question that to me is really tailing while the speaker of the House. You just now St- articles impeachment. You get your five committee chairs. You had Adam Schiff you had Jerry Nadler. You have. And they wouldn't take questions. I mean that tells me that they're really not inherently comfortable with what they're doing and I think this is the problem that we have Adam. Schiff has heard his voice for so long he simply believes what he's saying without any evidence of truth or any evidence of of facts here they simply simply won't get the clock in the calendar because they are so obsessed is so fearful that president trump is going to win again next November that they don't even Perceive the problems that they have A. It's very telling to me Muller. Didn't come up and neither did the fact of the quid pro quo robbery. All the focus group problems that they've had a little bit. They went with abusive lowry's they can define. What does that tell you sir tells me they have no case? It tells me that they tried everything they could so they had to come up with a two morphs things that they could come up with might born being but they they have the votes. We've known best shot bill. We've had that since November last year. We let me get. I felt about it yesterday. Main motive and opportunity. The opportunity came when they won the election last November. This has been a foregone conclusions as November of last year. Don't make any mistake about that. That they were soon as they had the majority there. We're GONNA to do this. And they tried everything possible from whitaker we went from cavenaugh. We went to remember my chairman. Who ran to be chairman? I'm the best handle impeachment in November of last year. And he's I two things as he was called over her saying. I'm going to impeach the president and Cavanaugh. I mean this is a man who is obsessed with not serving the public defending his oath of office. He's obsessed with impeaching the president. Everybody else with one more question here. Adam Schiff said we will leave it there. That was that was collins now to the phones to the phones. Eight seven seven nine seven Eric. Eight seven seven nine seven three seven. Four five Jimmy. You're going to be up. I welcome good morning morning. How are you good? I'm good I have a quick question for you I don't understand why nobody on republican side at least that I've not seen of the Democrat while q WanNa find out if there's something going on with by well okay you know. I'm glad you raised this issue. Did you know yesterday. Doug Collins Be Congressman from here in Georgia began that discussion on the art while the Democrats were arguing over articles of impeachment raised that issue and ABC CBS NBC. All of which were covering the hearing live left and went to commercial break when Doug Collins began talking about Joe Biden and Hunter Biden and the Democrats. Of course what nothing to do with Talking about the Biden's I gotTa tell you. I really do think that Biden is the Democratic nominee at this point The other Democrats are divided divided on this issue is going to come back to get him in. Two Thousand Twenty Biden has happened to come out now and say that he hundred Biden is going to do nothing Internationally while his dad is in the White House and and how can his dad enforce that I have no idea. Thanks very much for the phone. Call Jimmy in fact here's a PBS. Had A panel channel of reporters not pundits but the panel of reporters on PBS. Last night. Listen to this Mak- I think is onto something The Republicans have not yet been able to get to their arguments but wait. It's coming after the break. The familiar refrains about the aid was actually delivered that the President Obama. Uh I'm sorry. The president trump had a tougher policy. Then did President Obama hearsay and all the other arguments about corruption than it become become so familiar millier. I also think that while it may not have been illegal or even inappropriate perhaps for Hunter Biden to have been taking a monthly retainer from Burris Ma I just think that sort of clouds the atmosphere of whether it was proper for president trump to inquire about corruption. I think that is something that is sort of stuck out as I've sort of Talk to people outside of Washington the rest and it's a simple fact that people don't quite the understand. I even heard Vice President Biden sort of struggling to answer that question in an interview on. HBO Last Night. So that sort of hangs out there. And I think makes things that much more difficult for the Democrats to make the case. It does make it more difficult for the Democrats to make their case. They're they're going to have a hard time. The Democratic Party out there is GonNa Struggle to answer the questions about Joe Biden and hundred by in large part because Joe Biden himself has struggled about these things. this is you heard the reporter on axios or on On PBS mentioned. The axes interview with Joe Biden Let me play you some of this audio from Joe Biden discussing with Mike Allen of politico or. I'm sorry I'm with polio vaccine on HBO. Joe Biden discussing the hundred situation. He didn't handle it. Well on your son Hunter Biden. President trump says sweep. Joe Has Real. Problems reminds me of crooked. Hillary thirty three thousand deleted emails. What what are the Ukraine charges about you have been debunked and were unbear- one thing that what Democrats even do wonder about and that is hunter by your son was getting paid? A lot of money to serve on the board of the Ukrainian energy company facing serious corruption charges. You were the vice president running point on Ukraine the average Joe. Here's that and says that sounds fishy. Whats your understanding of what your son was doing for? An extraordinary amount of I don't know what he was doing. I know he was on the board. I found out he was on the board after he's on board and that was it and there's nobody time isn't that something you WanNa and get to the bottom of no because I trust my son but that doesn't pass the smell like when you're vice president. Isn't there a higher standard. You need to know what's happening with your family. Doing need need to put down some guardrails on on less there was something that was something that was wrong. There's nothing on his face. It was wrong so look if you WanNa talk about problems you know. Let's talk about trump's family. I mean come on. This is so amazing so you think that everything that happened was kosher. You know there's not one single bit of evidence about one Biden this point his positioning positioning them. Hand towards Mike Allen. You know that but you keep asking me these questions. It's okay he you know you're you're you're doing what you have to do but I'm not worried about it. Look the American public knows me last one on this. Say you're elected you're in office. What guardrails would you have to be? Sure that your son your brother. Jimmy doesn't do anything to trade on the family name. They will not be engaged in any foreign business. Because of what's happened in this administration issue. No one's going to be seeking patents for things China. No one's going to be engaged in that kind of thing so no foreign four and business for correct relatives. That was axios interviewing Joe Biden. Here's okay I realize I will be accused of being partisan when I say this Despite well you know I'm in the in the fund position of hating them all these days off. Aw all of them just politics has gotten gross. But can I just say a and I think I'm being objective here. Your mileage may vary objectively. I think Joe Biden has now what three months Cova December really September October November. He's had three full months minimum to prepare for this line of questioning. He said three full months minimum. Mom to prepare for this line of questioning. And he can't do it he can't answer he can't talk about but he can't engage with it without getting mad and I understand the protectiveness The the the willingness to protect his son I I get that at particularly given His sons battles with his own demons. I get the protective nature of Dad wanting to protect his son but Joe Biden is running to be president of the United States and he can't answer questions about his son and without getting defensive. And there's a reason for that you need to understand. It is because Americans intuitively understand. Understand that when a president has a son or when vice president has a son who is getting wealthy off his dad's time in office it reflects poorly on the father and Biden as vice. President had a son who was doing these things and his son already gave an interview where he said he told his dad. What was going on and Joe Biden in his said his aides did not tell him it was wrong? Why do you need to be told that it's wrong? What win listen and if my son? I'm on radio statewide in Georgia. If my son were to go out to businesses in Georgia in try to recruit them as clients if they had business before the legislature and say. I'm not going to lobby for you. You put me on my on your payroll and my dad's ads GonNa talk you up on the radio all the state legislature listens. That would be wrong now. My kids just turned eleven yesterday so it's not going to happen. But but if he did that would be wrong. If if I if I had a child who went out and told businesses put me on your payroll and I'm GonNa Talk You up to my dad So that you get favorable treatment by my dad because you're taking care of me it may not be criminal but it would be wrong. The Democrats are making the case that the president needs to be impeached largely because he did nothing criminal but he did something wrong. He did something that was abusive in office. He he did something that was an abuse of office. He did something That that no president should do in that. Any reasonable person should recognize. No president should do and that in so doing he was securing for himself and his family. Personal gain this one hundred. Did he didn't do anything criminal. There's no allegation that Hunter Biden did anything criminal would he did. Is he traded on his father's name to enrich himself and there are allegations in fact That he talked up these companies that were paying him to his father to whether or not they actually got favorable treatment to tip to get favorable treatment. There there's no evidence. They got favorable treatment because they were paying hundred but the Democrats want to impeach the president for doing abusive use of unethical things that were not illegal and they want to ignore the Joe Bites if the president of the United States is not going to to ignore this. And and this I think is the thing I just take this away from this conversation. The Democrats impeaching president trump. Insurer four that the Hunter Biden stuff is going to be a big issue next year on the campaign trail and the fact that Joe Biden has had three months minimum to to prepare for answers to the questions and can't do it without beginning. Combative does not bode well for the Democrats. If you weren't here in the first hour uh I did say I thought. It was notable that after several months of Democrats claiming the president is operating concentration camps along the southern border operating concentration camps is not one of the articles of impeachment. Yeah so maybe there are no concentration camps at this other you know. Actually I put this on twitter. I tweeted out remarkable. The Democrats are not impeaching the president for operating concentration camps. I guess they're okay with them. Were maybe they made it all up and several Democrats have responded. Well it's comprehensive. They're going to impeach him on something as opposed to they've been lying to you. There is a stunning contrast in Washington. Today that that I think is is really amazing The Democrats are actually going to hand the president significant legislative victories in the House representatives. Today everyone so focused on impeachment today in the press conference and the articles of impeachment and In fact the Democrats are going to pass the US. MCA The revision with the Mexico. Canada United States Mexico Canada agreement. And they're we're going to pass the paid family. Leave Act that Ivanka. Trump is one of. They're going to pass both of those things today. While also impeaching the very same president who will sign those things in law will that make those those measures illegitimate They say this is an illegitimate president. And and yet they're treating him as if he's illegitimate reminds me of the Democrats here in Georgia Treating Brian Kipah. Some mm sort of illegitimate governor and yet They're trying to curry favor with him on all sorts of things around the state so yes Democrats let's we'll be passing and I I gotTa tell you revise me the ever Dixon Quota Everett Dirksen Rather Dirksen was the Senate Republican leader. This is attributed to him by all sorts of people but it has never actually been confirmed that he said it. It's one of my favorite quotes about American politics though There are two parties in Washington. DC The stupid party and the evil party every once in a while these stupid party in the Evil Party get together and they do something. That is both stupid and evil. And that's what the press calls a bipartisan us on accomplishment there are two parties in Washington. DC The stupid party in the evil party every once in a while the stupid party and the Evil Party get together and they do something something that both stupid and evil. And that's what. The press calls a bipartisan accomplishment. Or today they'll call it the. US MCA in the paid family. Leave Act I. Just I'm I'm philosophically opposed goes to the federal government. Mandating paid family leave I. I'm sorry I know it makes me a heartless jerk but I'm philosophically opposed to the federal government. Mandating paid paid family leave. I think it is a Nanny state big government program that drives up the cost to companies that didn't impacts. They're not only bottom line but their ability to hire people. But that's okay. I'm in the minority. I realize it you know when I was a political consultant would run candidates for office. I would always tell them No when you're you know when you think you're right and everyone else thinks you're wrong no when you're in the minority But you think you're right And understand that so I can take a position understand. I'm in the minority and still I believe I'm right but That should put in perspective. How I go about talking about now? I'm not running for office. Just be blunt with you. I think it's a terrible idea and I realize I'm in the minority. Oh you need to let the mommy stay home and raise the babies and they go back door. Here's the problem though. You're in a high profile job. You're an executive accompanying you take paid family leave and then then you start complaining that their bothering you at home. Will you know what you chose to be in a high executive position And make yourself indispensable person. Don't be surprised when your fortune in five hundred company decide you actually are an indispensable person and continues to bother you while you're on paid family leave time whether you're a mom or a daddy I I. I saw somebody. The other day complained about this online. That did they were on it. It was actually. It was a guy who is taking a spousal leave after a new board and he was complaining that his company called every day to check in his assistant was calling with things to get his feedback on and he was complaining that he was on leave. I'm sorry sorry but you're the guy who wanted that promotion to get into that particular position Where you're now relied on by an entire company for your judgment on things and you WANNA take Several months off with no communication with you can't do that. No company can sustain itself that long if you do that. But I'm I realize I'm in the minority and it makes me a bad guy bla-bla-bla when we come back we talk about the Richard Jewel movie please. It's getting all sorts of buzz out there including from here in Georgia with the JC. It is Eric Erickson. Listen here across the state of Georgia. I want to shift gears away from impeachment and the like And we'll we'll get back to that. It will take your phone calls as well. Eight seven seven nine seven Eric. Eight seven seven nine seven three seven four to five. But I I wanNA spend a moment on the Richard Richard. Jewell move me movie and I WANNA be a little I I WANNA be a exercise discretion in how I talk about it and I'll albee up front and full disclosure with you I do an evening radio show on on WSB in Atlanta and it is owned by the Cox Media Group and and Our flagship station for this show as well is WG A in Athens. Where I'm my show comes from to the rest of you? It it is also owned by Cox and the Atlanta Journal Constitution is owned by Cox so it is as a sister media outlet to the outlets that. Pay My bills So I I want you to know all of that as far as conflict of interest disclosure and everything else going into this Clint Eastwood has a new movie. Coming out Richard Richard Jewel. It is about Richard Jewel the hero of the nineteen ninety six Olympics For those of you. Unfamiliar With the story in Nineteen ninety-six. Six A man planted a bomb at Centennial Olympic. Park and Richard Jewel was the Eric Robert. Rudolph offers that he hit out the mountains wherever he was captured in. Two thousand five he'd also blown up at abortion clinic or some such a killed an abortion doctor But Richard Jewel was is the security guard at Centennial Olympic. Park during the bombing and he saw the the backpack in which the bomb was and eh called it in and begin getting people into the area. I think one or two people were killed. The number of people injured but Richard Jewell was a certifiable genuine when hero he saw the bomb did exactly what is training called him to do and got people out of the way now. Richard Jewell was not a police officer he worked worked as an independent contractor through security firm and had idolized police. A law enforcement and that became an issue and there were some within the FBI and the media who suspected that jewel had manufactured the bomb in order order to make himself a hero and to gain exposure and notoriety and there were many news outlets that ran the details details of what the FBI suspected including at the JC and The ritual wound up suing them all the case against the AJC went on until Jewel Bentley died of a heart condition and a lot of his cases were dismissed Including I think the AJC case as wound up ultimately going nowhere for him but He was ultimately vindicated in declared a hero by multiple outlets and people people he was redeemed but in getting Richard Jewel to that point it is flat out. What's what's undeniable that media outlets savaged Richard Jewell's reputation? And Frankly I. I don't think it is disputed that local media outlets in Georgia also played a role in Casting doubts on Richard Jewel and reporters will tell you and they will argue until they're blue in the face that they weren't actually casting doubt on Richard Joel that the FBI had suspicions about jewel and they were just reporting that well. In the movie of the Richard Jewel movie there is an AJC reporter who is featured. She's played by Olivia Wilde And the actual reporters now deceased and there is a suggestion that she had sexual relations with the FBI agent and that's how she got the information now as it was originally portrayed in and this is again and media outlets ran with this part of the story without having seen the movie as it was originally portrayed aid or as it was originally suggested some media outlets the movie shows this reporter having sex with the FBI agent and the FBI agent telling her that Richard Jewel Is the chief. Suspect she runs with and it begins the spiraling out of control of what happened with Richard Jewel. Now actually what the movie shows shows. According to those who have now seen the movie is that she suggests that they should sleep with each other But you don't actually see that on camera and it is a suggestion made made and ironically many of the media outlets that have gone just dialed up to eleven on a ten point scale of outrage outrage over Clint Eastwood Made their initial claims that Clint Eastwood is going to portray this reporter is sleeping with the FBI agent to get get a source of information The movie according to the Hollywood reporter does not actually show that the movie just says There's a suggestion that maybe this happened. That the reporter says when we're going to sleep with each other have sex or whatever I'm trying to be delicate here. There may be kids in the car with you are wherever you are. You're listening but So it seems like some of the initial reporting from some of the initial news outlets got it wrong as to what the movie actually depicts a but there is a suggestion gesture in the movie that maybe she did this. I gotTa Tell You The movie into they disclaimer the AJC the constitution and Cox Enterprises Is Demanding Mandy a disclaimer to make it very clear that there is no evidence that there reporter slept with an FBI agent to get information. The the movie actually has a disclaimer at the end of it. That says that there are The the history is true What what the story depicted is true but that there are certain things within the movie That are not true but or to make the movie and and that's not good enough for the AJC understandably so here. Here's where I come down on this why I think this is something that we do need to pay some attention to. It is interesting to me to see the media out now demanding clarification demanding disclaimer and demanding gene information that that writes perceived wrongs about Clint Eastwood Movie. That they haven't seen without seeing the movie and it is much the the same media. That maligned indisputably maligned. Richard Jewel. That being said I don't think maligning a dead reporter to tell a story is the right thing to do. I don't think that Attacking this reporter in making. It seem like she did sleep with an F. B. I.. Agent to get information is a good decision by By Clint Eastwood let me read you. Part of the deadline reporting reporting Marty singer who is a lawyer representing Cox Enterprises in the Atlanta Journal Constitution Senator Letter and said it is highly ironic that a film purporting to tell a tragic story of how the reputation of an FBI suspect was grievously. Tarnished appears bit on a path to severely tarnish rhenish the reputation of the AJC a newspaper with a respected hundred fifty year-old publishing legacy fueled by controversy of the past two weeks over the film's depiction of the Olivia Wilde portrayed. Kathy scruggs allegedly trading sex with an FBI agent for information that security guard jewel was their lead suspect in the nineteen ninety six Atlanta Olympics bombing. The correspondents ascend today makes no bones about the next step being defamation lawsuit in various jurisdictions against danced against Clint Eastwood and Warner Brothers. Now Warner Brothers is doubling down own on this in saying they are prepared to fight this lawsuit against filed by the JC They call it baseless This is from also from deadline Warner brothers is more than willing to take on the newspaper. According to this report A studio source confirmed a deadline that there has always been a disclaimer in the movie that reads the disclaimer. At the end of the film is The film is based on actual historic events dialogue and certain events and characters contained in the film were created for the purpose of dramatization. The scene apparently in the movie by those who have seen it does not show that That MS scruggs slept with an FBI agent But instead have her in conversation with the F. B. I. Agent here's the the deadline in paragraph paragraph here relevant paragraph while not explicitly showing anything. There is a scene in the film in which Wilde's character scruggs basically asks and FBI source where they're they're going to have sex after getting insider information on the bombing investigation by the bureau. What the media did to Richard Jewell was wrong? It was a feeding frenzy and Clint Eastwood has been on a roll with a lot of movies. of late his his hero series as some people are going to our anti hero series as some people are calling it where he chronicles people who I guess you could call him Call Them anti-heroes rose Nontraditional heroes where I mean even the mule He plays I mean he plays as real people he plays a or people who are based on real people like in the mule Earl Zone. He does American sniper He does The trouble with the curve The grand jury this history of movies where he's been putting out these movies just their icon. ICK MOVIES I mean. Just just listen to the the last line of movies that he's done these are it starts with American sniper and then there is sully and then there's the fifteen seventeen to Paris And then there's the mule now there's Richard Jewel and he chronicles a number of people. Who they they have interesting stories? Were oftentimes maligned in the press or were mischaracterized in the press or misunderstood by the press and Clint Eastwood has sought to Tell L. E. compelling story that gets their story right in Richard Jewel case. It was yes the FBI was concerned concerned about Richard Jewel and he. He fit a profile of someone who because of his infatuation with the law enforcement Maybe just maybe he was a suspect now in truth the FBI treats everyone as a as a suspect and in truth the F. B. I Quickly dismissed him but the media continue to portray him as a suspect in October of nineteen ninety six the US attorney. Ken Alexander Sent Richard Jewel letter formerly clearing him stating that based on. The evidence developed a date. Richard Jewell is not considered a target of the Federal Criminal Investigation into the bombing on July twenty seven nineteen ninety-six at Centennial Olympic Park. He was never charged The FBI searched his home. They questioned associates. They were ruling everyone out and Jill because he found the bomb way and the profile of someone who wanted media attention for being a hero pro fit the profile but he was actually a euro. Here's the thing though. I think Kevin Reilly in the AJC have merit merit to their argument that you should not portray journalist is sleeping with someone for sourcing information Just to sex up a movie movie. When you're essentially in order to redeem Richard Jewel maligning someone else unfairly? There's no evidence that she even suggested that she in the FBI agents should lead to. This is a real reporter. This is a real woman with a real family and she is now dead into she is no longer here to defend herself. and Richard Jewel is no longer here to defend himself. And I I I really do think it's bad form for this movie and I see people say oh. It's really rich for for the media to become an after all this stuff. Look what they did to Richard Jewell. And and I'm in that camp. But I also think is really rich of a movie to try to defend and rehabilitate the character in honor of a man. Dan in part by tearing down the character of someone else who was just doing her job as a reporter who in her reporting was actually covering that the F. B. I really did believe he was potentially the bomber. Richard Jewell got a terrible rap. He was so terribly maligned. He he was ostracized he. His life was ruined for a period of time. It was hard on him. It was hard on his mother mother. It was hard on his friends. But what about Kathy scruggs. Who many people were going to watch the movie? And they're gonNA say. Oh well. This is just a fictional character concocted to tell the story no shoes real person. She had a real family. She lost her battle with cancer. And I I just. I wish that Clint Eastwood had chosen differently now. I don't think that the suit route can i. There was a suggestion conversation in a dramatization. I don't think they have a basis for the lawsuit but I I gotta say I understand their outrage over. This and I don't think that we need to play tit for tat. We don't say well they did. Richard Rule it's turnabouts fairplay. No turnabouts not fair play. This isn't grade school. This isn't kindergarten I intend to see this movie. It is getting incredible reviews in early releases. It is a story that should be told but I will go into it. Understanding that in redeeming Richard Jewel. They made a decision. Clint Eastwood made a decision To sex it up a a little bit with a reporter and it maligns the character of a woman who is now dead and can't defend herself and there's going to be a little bit of irony in the movie Maligning maligning someone to redeem someone. who had himself been maligned? And I think that's unfortunate and they could have done something differently. I I have decided did I am going to sit out A sugar cookie recipe. It's perfect time for that. You've all got Christmas parties coming up. I sent out the the ginger cookie recipe which are got great feedback on that one. I'm going to the sugar cookie recipe now and it's easy to make And it's highly highly addictive. I actually do need to warn you about this cookie recipe My mother-in-law made them and I think I ate them all in one sitting like twenty four cookies and got sick. They were that good. I know and I'm fat so I shouldn't have It is a really good recipe Zoe if you all the recipe text the word recipe two three three seven seven seven And I will send it out tomorrow. I you gotTA fight. It's written on a note card and type it out for you. I don't even have so I keep I keep a program on my computer called Paprika and it's an APP on my phone and my laptop my ipad and it syncs all of my recipes to great cooking APP By the way someone asked me and I guess I need to do this. And I'll I'll all set out on the recipe list Gift Recommendations for people I will tell you it is expensive but my latest latest and greatest toy in the kitchen that I have not really in the kitchen. It's on the back porch that I thoroughly enjoy and having had multiple Ebel. Different ones The Rock box is a keeper. ROTC CBO X.. I'll I'll put a lincoln the recipe email emails text recipe. Two three three seven seven seven. It is an outdoor pizza oven and it is portable. It weighs a ton but it is small. You could make twelve inch pizza in it The this a- all the latest craze perfect I was at Taba at Phipps plaza in Atlanta on Saturday and they had one in there not a rock box but a different little outdoor pizza oven. Evan and they had a different variety at Williams sonoma and I have owned One of those and the crap They are they don't retain heat. Well it takes them Doesn't they don't heat up. Well they don't retain heat. Well the rock box is the best Is Actually made in England. And a you can get intimate williams-sonoma now in fact I impressed rick. Perry the Secretary of energy so much with mind that he went out and bought one for him and his wife And you so you can make a twelve inch Neapolitan style pizza in the southern it gets you can roast. A chicken roasted a chicken in this thing to it gets up to nine hundred degrees Fahrenheit. I I roasted a whole chicken. The spatchcock though defeated in because the opening is a very high. That's where you cut out the backbone. And you flatten the chicken I roasted one in this oven and it took maybe thirty minutes in this oven I didn't turn it all the way up to nine hundred degrees Fahrenheit but I got it up pretty high You stick the legs tours. Back in the bone from the leg burns to a crisp But the rest of the chicken cokes. Just perfectly it stayed juicy. It was it was incredible I've done pizza in it uh-huh I've cooked shrimp in and a chicken in it. It's great it's called Rock box. ROTC Buick notes like five hundred bucks. Full disclosure But you can do. You can do either. wood-burning burning or gas. You know with the Neapolitan Pizza. You're only allowed four ingredients flour salt water and yeast flour salt water yeast. Yep that's four four ingredients for Neapolitan Pizza. That's all you're allowed to put in it. And it's got to be baked in less than two minutes with both La- Mozzarella and San Marzano tomatoes and Basil in a wood burning oven that gets up to nine hundred degrees Fahrenheit. And you can do that in Iraq box. You can get authentic Neapolitan style pizzas and the rock box and in most these other outdoor pizza oven. Things you can't I highly recommend it. If you're interested in out if you want to add to an outdoor pizza outdoor kitchen. Get the right box when we come back all we gotta move all aligned. Fox News Brennan Bill Hemmer to replace Ship Smith. It's time for me to tell you about my favorite toothbrush. Holiday season is approaching. And you can get to quip. The quip is actually. It's great stocking stuffer. It's a great toothbrush. A you know. I had one of those hundred dollar Sonic vibrating toothbrushes. And you had to take the charger with you. It was just it was garbage Didn't like it. The brush head was very small. You could not get the brush head on the truth. Brush of the back of your mouth actually clean The the back of your teeth. The quip is designed by designers and Dennis working together. You can totally tell. It's got sensitive. Sonic vibrations and a timer with thirty second pulses to guide your routine You got the quick floss Austin Spencer it has premark strings. You can always use the right amount You Got Quip Syndrome and you brush head every three months. They've got a great great great great toothbrush and Nell flossy as well. Just go to get quip dot com slash Erickson to save on gift sets. Get your first. Brush a refill pack for free with refill. Plan so to get your first brush at refill for free at get Quip Q.. U. IP DOT com slash. Erickson get quick dot com slash Erickson. It is a great toothbrush. Rush is the toothbrush that I've been using for multiple years. My wife and child used as well. I really do recommend quip. I really am user and I was before I started doing this commercial. That's that's why I really recommended. GET QUIP DOT com. Why hello there welcome it? Is Eric Erickson here across the state of Georgia. The full number eight seven seven nine nine seven Eric. Eight seven seven nine seven three seven. Four two five dot com is reporting this right now happening now if you have an Amazon echo or Google home the FBI has some urgent advice for you. The temptation and to get a machine to turn your lights on for you is very strong. It makes you feel masterful in save you from having to get up from the SOFA. There's a tiny catch about Internet of things devices. However they may not that'd be entirely secure? Don't take my word for it for devices like Amazon Echo and Google home are the subject of a tech warning from the FBI the FBI has released a slightly lightly. nerve-affecting warning here's what the FBI says Digital Assistant Smart Watches fitness trackers home security devices thermostats. Refrigerators refrigeration I'm half Cajun Half Swedish. Don't blame me refrigerators. And even light light bulbs or all on the list. Add to that all the fun stuff remote controlled robots games gaming systems interactive dolls talking stuffed animals. The list seems endless. Hackers can use these innocent devices to do a virtual drive-by of your digital life unsecured devices can allow hackers a path into your router. Giving the bad guy access to everything else in your home network that you thought was secure our private pictures and passwords safely stored on your computer. Don't be so sure. Change the devices factory settings from the default password. A simple Internet search should tell you how if you can't find that information. Consider moving on to another. Their product. Mini connected devices are supported by Mobile APPs on your phone. These APPS kit could be running in the background and using default permissions that you never realized you approved know what kind of personal information. These APPS are collecting and say no to privilege requests. That make no sense. Secure your network. Your Fridge in your laptop should not be on the same network work. Keep the most your most private sensitive date on a separate system from your other IOT devices. Iot Internet of things. I've been having this conversation with my friends about the Internet of things. The Internet of things is the things in your house that are randomly connected to the Internet and it seems like there are Groups out there now that try to find every which way to connect everything in your house to the Internet so I have a Christmas present coming today in of all things. That is a toaster oven. Those of you. Who Know me understand that this dislike gets the VIN diagram of things I mention? It is right smack in the center. It is called the June soon oven and it is an oven. That is an Internet of things devices connected to the Internet and learns. It has a camera in the oven. So you put Bacon in the oven and the camera recognizes. You've put baking in the oven. And so all you do is say you want it crispy or my I son likes bacon that is grossly limp. When we go to waffle house he orders seriously he orders Limp Bacon? We used to order order bacon. That was floppy like a fish because that would be when he was little how he described how he liked it and at waffle house they call that Limp Bacon. So you go to get loop vacant. I the Viagra Bacon. I want the bacon that that is hard and crispy and is is delicious. He wants the Bacon that is is floppy and in need of of of it just limp. Bacon sounds gross. It is gross and he loves it and he eats he seriously. I'm not making this up. He each three pieces of cold limp Bacon every day at school. There's love my son but he is. I was a picky eater when I was a kid but seriously we grew up in Dubai and we would travel abroad in my mother. We keep Heinz Ketchup in her purse. Our very first trip abroad We lived in Dubai you buy and we went to Cypress. We went to the island of Cyprus. My mother wanted to see where Saint Paul had been on the island and we went to the island. Abby just biogra- bagels seriously though. I mean the kid so we go to Cypress I'm I guess I'm five or six. Were on the island of Cyprus. And I won't eat anything because in Europe those who've never been to Europe they will oftentimes times dilute ketchup with vinegar. And so it's a very very and I realize there's been a green ketchup but it's like really vinegar. It's like tomato vinegar. It's disgusting and I wouldn't I. We need anything. I was starving on this island so my mother would have to carry Heinz Ketchup everywhere. We went We went to a Chinese restaurant very first place that ever had sweet and sour shrimp was was a Chinese restaurant on the island of Cyprus. There is your worlds colliding and I ate my sweet and Sour shrimp with himes catch up in this Chinese restaurant that we had befriended a taxi cab driver named George and George lived with his sister. They were goat herders. They would make goat cheese. George drove a taxi and and he drove us all over the island where we could go because it was disputed divided between the Turkish Cypriots but we had to get weak. George had to take us to the grocery store to get an unopened bottle of Heinz Ketchup. So that I can eat on the island and I may picky picky eater. My son however puts me to shame he beats floppy like a fish limp bacon. He eats chicken nuggets He'll eat home chicken nuggets. He'll eat chicken nuggets from chick-fil-a he'll eat chicken nuggets from not the Burger King by our house but by another burger king and he'll eat chicken nuggets for McDonald's he'll eat peanut butter and jelly toast and he will eat pepperoni only pizza but he wants the pepperoni pulled off and he eats the Pepperoni separate from the pizza and cheese sticks from some restaurants but not others. That's that's about. The extent of my sons Diet and in our pediatrician says he'll he'll grow out of it. In fact there's hope He has just now begun sampling cheeseburgers and he has decided he likes the cheeseburger from. I'm five guys but really that's cover for the French fries. He wants the French fries from five guys. And I cannot believe I'm doing a monologue on Viagra Bacon and my son's eating habits but he wants floppy like a fish bacon so anyway in this June oven that I'm getting it should be. It may actually be. There's a big box that Fedex is. I have a window in my studio at home and I can see. There's a box out that may be it. Don't come by yet in rob me You can put in the Bacon and say hey I want crispy Bacon Eakin or I want Limp Bacon or non crispy Bacon. I think and it will do it. You don't even have to set the temperature already that you just push the camera says. Hey are you got baking you say Yep and it says do you want it crispy or do you want floppy like a flesh fish. You pop it in and says Oh you've got five strips of Bacon. It'll five strips of Bacon differ from one strip of Bacon. It's it's imprint. I can't wait for this thing We we use a regular toaster house by Weisman wanting a toaster oven and I just. I couldn't find a good toaster. Oven and Cook's illustrated recommends the June oven. There's like it's favourite. Toaster oven smart or not smart so I figure hey what the heck I'll get it. It was on sale So I would get it. But it's an internet of things device in so it connects via wi I five to June and it constantly gets new updates so every once in a while you get a software update in. Suddenly you're June oven does new stuff. which is Kinda cool? Actually you can dehydrate stuff tough. It's now an Air Fryer at well does all sorts of stuff but I I get the the reason for an Internet of things toaster oven but why do you need your refrigerator. Raider connected to the Internet. I think it's Samsung has an internet connected refrigerator. Why why does your oven need to be connected to the Internet? Unless it's like this June it has a camera and it cooks itself or whatever you put in it Why why does your? Why does your oven need an internet of things device or have you heard about the ring doorbells many of you people have ring doorbells and a hacking group has hacked into the ring database and can see where all the ring doorbells are now and can see the footage off the ring? DOORBELLS can listen. To the the the the microphones or so there was an article Michael yesterday. About how the ring microphones in the ring cameras. They're sharing information with the police whether you consider not if you use the neighbors APP we've so I a US just just let me cut to the chase and give you a solution on all of this If you have an apple device your apple device you don't have to worry about. Siri is not listening to you like your Amazon Alexa or your Google Bod apple so apple. I want to do home devices. Internet of things. We've got light switches like the Philips shoe stuff in our house So our lights turn on sunset our Christopher. We got our Christmas lights on on apples. The Home Kit So you can our lights turn on and turn off. I can tell you I've got it called holiday so I can say hey dingus. I'm not gonNA say the other because it may activate your device. Hey dingus turn on the holidays and all of a sudden. The Christmas tree comes on the wreath comes on the Little Dude. Outside the nutcracker guy he starts banging the drum and the the inflatable able Teddy Bear Santa Claus POPs up out of the ground and inflates. And and it's awesome and then I can say hey dingus turned off the holidays or I can set it on on remote. We got it set setup so in the morning when the alarm clock goes off Siri knows. Turn on the lights downstairs. Start the coffee pot. It's fantastic. I love it but I wouldn't do it with Alexa or or or or with Google because they're not secure. The reason I use the apple home could stuff is that it's very secure and it's a pain in the butt to get the devices installed unlike the other devices because there's an extra security layer so hackers can't get in and start controlling your lights and most people don't realize that unless you're using apple's home kit With with the extra security layer every home kit device has that's why apple is slow rolling this stuff out because every home kit device has a little chip in it for security The other stuff doesn't which is why they're so much more of it. It's it's less expensive. It's easier to get setup it's easier to use but it's also so way less secure and hackers are hacking into this stuff so if you got Internet of things devices I just I have no idea why why we need Internet of things devices. There was an article. y'All maybe I shouldn't be talking about this one. There was an article in. What is is that website? Not In gadget What's the unserious for e Gizmodo? Gizmodo Gizmodo Gizmodo is was owned by the Gawker people. People I forget who owns it now. Huffington post or some such But they were talking about a Internet connected Pleasure in device. Let's just leave it like that. We've already referenced Viagra Bacon so we can we'll just we'll just say it was an internet connected device Four four pleasure. I don't know why I don't understand. What the hackers hacked that? You could get electrocuted. Did and somebody's GonNa find your body. That person die died of a good time again. No idea I mean. People want to put the Internet and everything today. I'm turning red face and I haven't said anything that should embarrass me. Have I just. I don't understand this so now the FBI if you're wondering what this is all a roundabout skewed his way of referencing the FBI has come out with this warning today. saying increasingly hackers or hacking people stuffing. You don't even know what they're surveilling you now. L. To bring this full circle and to have something that's more grownup unless embarrassing. This goes to the New York Times story that you know so there are two stories the New York Times story on kids being put into Compromising positions through the Internet and then there's The Washington Post story about the Afghanistan papers revealing the amount of lying that's going on in the Pentagon across multiple administration amount of unison and the impeachment officers GonNa Bury both those stories out of the headlines but to put this Internet of things story this FBI warning. That's come out today. And proper perspective. Consider this people seriously grownup story here. I had to have this discussion with my eleven year old yesterday. Because he's big on fortnight there are people who are hacking the cameras in your playstations xboxes. Fox's in your tablet devices. Non Apple tablet a very hard to. There's a a again. Apple is big on building their own devices because they put in physical chips It makes it very hard to turn on remotely the camera in your ipad But if you got an an android tablet or an android phone Hackers have figured out easy easy ways to hack into those inactivate the cameras on your laptops tablets on your games and the New York Times had this very serious story over the weekend about people reaching out to kids through fortnight through minecraft through other things and say I've got compromising pictures of you. I hacked. Act Your camera and I know who your friends are on your device and I'm GonNa send your friends all of these embarrassing pictures of you unless you send me naked photos of yourself and thankfully in some cases the parents figured out what was going on and and caught it before. The kids decided to do that. But there were several cases where kids had essentially descended into an abusive relationship with an anonymous person over the Internet Because those people had either hack devices and we're spying on the kids or more commonly what is most most common is they befriended the kids in these first person shooter. Games that are played over the Internet built up trust with the kid and then started making gene claims to the kid That they had hacked in some cases they hadn't and then a couple of cases I believe they had hack devices in most cases they hadn't but they built up trust with kid and turn on the kid and the kid really believe when they said they had these incriminating pictures and they're going to embarrass them with their friends and whatnot. It is a dangerous thing and increasingly. We're seeing unscrupulous scrupulous people get into these devices and hack these devices and you do need to be careful now. Let me let me close this out with this point. Many of you like me probably if you are in the least bit. Tech Savvy have probably purchased some of these for your elderly parents because you recognize the convenience of your parent being able to say hey dingus. Turn on my lights or Hey dingus. Call my daughter because I follow it on the floor or something you need to make sure were there. Devices are secure. Because they're going to get hacked their their information is going to get compromised. And the hackers GONNA know they're old and they're not gonNA come through their Amazon device or their device. They're gonNA come through the phone and they're gonNA pretend they know the person and they're going to read that person's bank account and so get serious and understand if you have these Internet devices in your house if you're getting get them for Christmas. Be Mindful of this. I was at the bank the other day and there were like now. This is a a while back. I was at the bank and there was an elderly woman in their whose grandson had taken all of her money out of her checking account without her permission and it was the woman's preacher. You're there with her demanding. The Bank make her right and that's happening within a family and it happens every day across this country elder abuse kids taking the advantage of of older parents and grandparents and it's increasingly happening with these Internet of things devices. I'm not telling you they're bad and that you shouldn't take him out of your house. I would be hypocritical. I did because I got a lot of them in my house but just be mindful that they're there and the capabilities that a stranger can get a hold of them in us and also eat crispy Bacon. Don't don't eat Bacon Erickson here. The phone number of the program. Eight seven seven nine seven Eric. Eight seven seven nine seven three seven four to five Charlie early says I was too rambling and didn't get to the point of the last monologue and I should apologize to everyone for wasting your time to wait for the buy into the monologue to tie it all together and get to the point you know. Most people are their own chief critic Not with me. No no but I've got my wife and Charlie to keep me humble. He's got a text me angrily. I have to give him a hard time to keep him. Humble my buddy Dan McLaughlin baseball -ASEBALL crank on twitter writes for National Review and he's got a series of tweets. I want to read for you very quickly. I can't read that text. I can't read that texts now. Now he's dropping bad words at me. I never said that he says whatever okay. Dan mclachlan rights legal merits aside spending years accusing accusing Donald Trump of treason bribery and conclusion. And then impeaching him for none of those things but including an article article on obstruction of Congress as one of the two charges seems like disastrously inside beltway politics. I do not see how abuse of power and obstruction of congress is a better idea for selling this to the public than abuse of power but then several of the articles against Andrew Johnson never even even came to a vote. Once the strongest charge failed the obstruction count does not include any charge of perjury witness tampering. Anything like that. It's literally just you refuse to cooperate. Operate with our investigation of you. Knowing you lack the votes of the Senate y include this. Who is the man in the street audience? Let's face it a lot of people. Oh fuel that trump was elected basically to give Congress the finger and trump has no obligation help anybody investigating. I don't endorse those sentiments. But this is not the hill die on if I was democrats I'd likely support. Impeaching trump precisely because impeachment under these circumstances is an exercise in political messaging. The House can if it likes US impeachment to make a case of presidential and fitness ahead of an election but then sell it. Not One vote is going to change to trump's detriment next November by accusing accusing trump of refusing to help congress removing from office. I just don't see the political rationale You know he's right the fact that they dodged judged the muller situation altogether the fact that they still have left hanging the issue of who the WHO the the whistleblower is it's actually pretty telling pretty staggering. This really is about setting the stage for November. It is not about actually getting the president of office. If it was getting the president out of office they would actually impeach him for all the things. They've spent the last several months complaining about bribery Burri witness tampering and the like none of that is in the impeachment articles. None of that is. The president has largely been his own worst enemy. It has been protected by a great many people around him who did not do what he wanted them to do. But there is one other thing as well. The president of the United States also has the Democrats on the other side and they keep screwing things up. The president is blessed by enemies as incompetent as the Democrats. When it comes to stuff like this it makes no sense that they've done what they've done you're really doesn't and yet that's the road? They're going to go down all these irons in the fire all of a sudden welcome back. Sorry I'm I'm having to respond to a kind of time sensitive email all of a sudden the phone number here. Eight seven seven nine seven Eric. Eight seven seven nine seven three seven even four to five. I you know what no no. You do need to know that Stacey. Abrams is declared that she would be willing to be the the vice presidential nominee that would not Quash her ambitions. You know being a Georgia show for people in Georgia Broadcasting from Georgia Let let me spend just a moment on this we stacey Abrams and I haven't wanted to talk about Abrahams a lot. There there have been stories out. There's a lot of people attacking her for example over a film deal. She Got God. Bless her for it I have you know she's a novelist she's an accomplished. Novelist actually usually may not be my cup of tea or yours but she's had success in novels and and some of those now or possibly going to be adapted into movies I would say say arguably it is because of her Notoriety now as a candidate Whether she won or lost is a candidate for office who galvanize people on the left a lot of whom are in Hollywood but God bless her for making to live with. I don't fault her for that at all. The I I see conservative blowing up Barack Obama's eighty somewhat hypocritical for buying a multi million dollar house also Martha's island God. Bless him for it he. He's made a lot of money. Enjoy it now. He's no longer president of the United States. You can you can stop hating him. You can say he blew what millionaires and billionaires and and black people getting rich off office He got rich off. Bull deals and TV deals and Netflix. And you may not like it. You may think zipper critical. But I I don't care I just I got too much got not enough time of the day to be outraged by everything. I applaud. Everyone being successful it is one more person person who is GONNA stand up to Elizabeth Warren. Once they're successful knowing Elizabeth words GONNA come get them in their money and in fact. Barack Obama has been coming out today. I don't think we need to go. Go down this road. Good for him. a stacey. Abrams was to make money. God bless her. I I gotTa Tell Ya and I continue to maintain this stacey. You know everyone gets mad at me. I've been asked not to say this on radio. A really have I had a friend of mine. Say I shouldn't say this on radio could be harmful for my career career as a conservative talk. Show host to say this but I tend to like most people even when I disagree with them and I thought that I interviewed every single person running for for governor of Georgia Democrat and Republican. I interviewed every single. One of my interviewed Brian Michael Williams Casey Cagle Hunter Hills Stacey Evans and Stacey Abrams who else was running for governor. There there were other people. Running for governor. Seems like any of it. I interviewed them. All and my two favorite interviews were Brian. Brian Kelp and Stacey Abrams the reason that I liked Brian Kim's interview when I interviewed him and they were they were hour long interviews for breach of them. The reason I liked Branka his was actually. The first interview is Brian. KIP just did not care. And I liked that now I maybe I shouldn't put it that way He wishes laid back he was. He was there to run for governor but he was going to tell you what what he thought. Matter of factly he was just going to tell you. He came in in jeans and boots. Worst dress shirt and a blazer but jeans and boots most everybody else came in in in suits and most everybody else set on the edge of their chair ear as if I was GONNA ask them the most game changing question he just laid back in. The chair kicked out his legs and we had a great conversation and just about life life and politics and policies and who he was and where he came from and he was just he was a genuine human being and I like those sorts politicians. Those are increasingly unique in American in life. You need to understand that That in American politics these days people who are politicians tend to have come from birth in a three piece suit Ready to answer all of your questions as nebulous as possible lest they be forced to take a position on something not Bryant came out. Here's what he believes. You don't like it. We can be friends. Were just going to disagree on this. Stacey Abrams was very much the same way she came in to a conservative talk show host host with a reputation of being a conservative political activist. Who she knew was never going to vote for her and sat down and we had a fantastic conversation appreciation about her growing up about her life? And here's the thing that I have continued to appreciate about her. And it is the thing that is consistent about her and I know so it pains people to hear me. Say Something Nice about Stacey Abrams. She's funny she can laugh at herself. It is one thing for a politician in America to be able to laugh at someone else. It is a rare politician to be able to laugh at themselves. You would be surprised fries at the number of politicians who will not make a joke at their own expense and she made lots of jokes at her expense. And I found it endearing because I've been around enough politicians and have done enough interviews over the last twenty years that I can tell when someone really believes what they're saying and is authentic think about it in his willing to open up and be vulnerable in public and she was and Brian Kemp was and they were unique in that regard They were willing to crack jokes on themselves. They were willing willing to be opened. They were willing to be vulnerable. They they were willing to Say they didn't have all the answers. That was another thing that struck me compare and I don't want to go into in into attacking checking other candidates but but I interviewed other candidates Democrat and Republican who could not bring themselves to utter three words words. Those three words were I don't know Abrahams and Kim were willing to and I find it refreshing when a candidate whether I agree with them or not is willing to say you know what I don't have all the answers now as to the answer she had she and I. We disagreed on all sorts of we found common ground on issues. And this is the thing that I find more. This is why I. I'm very very hesitant to ever call someone on the other side an enemy. They're just opponent. There were a number of situations where she and I could look at a situation and say objectively the situation as bad but we had different solutions. Her solution always involved the government and oftentimes. My solution would be leave it alone. It's a problem but there's nothing the government should do about it. One of those issues is one of the. The latest concerns of Democrats nationwide is what they call the food desert. It is yet another moral crisis and the Democrats have gotten really good. Everything is a moral crisis. Climate change is a moral crisis. Income inequality is a moral crisis Prison populations of moral crisis. Everything's a moral crisis food. Deserts or more Morressy. You wonder what is a food desert. It is a grocery store with sand. No a food is where you live somewhere in Georgia And you have to drive a significant distance to get to a grocery store or access to fresh food is limited did that is a food desert and there are a food desert in Metro Atlanta Georgia around the old Turner Field that that is now Georgia state. It is a wall in isolated expanse of interstate and projects and there is not a grocery store anywhere near there. And if you are poor and of limited mobility because of your lack of access to transportation You have a hard time going anywhere. Other than the local dairy Queen Queen or Wendy's to get food and that's not healthy. You have no access to fresh vegetables. the local corner grocery stores that you depend on. Don't have fresh vegetables. They have processed foods foods and believe it or not. The scientific evidence does show that that eating on the perimeter of the grocery store the fresh fruits and vegetables the fresh meats and dairy is better here for either the processed foods but you go to the little quarter grocery store. You're going to get lots processed foods and maybe there's some milk that's not expired. That is a food desert. You Move to rural Georgia. You may have an ingles thirty minutes away from you. And that's the best you can do now Stacey Abrams I you know what I want to be has it. Because it's been a long time since we had the interview but essentially but essentially several every Democrats have proposed either. We've got to increase funding for rural transportation to get people to grocery stores or we need to economically comically incentivized grocery stores moving into certain areas. So people have access to it. That is a democratic solution. I don't want to put words in Stacey Abrams about I I think that was that was one of hers was expanding transport in rural Georgia. A spending government money to expand Georgia. What is my solution? My solution is a as a conservative is. Yes this is a problem and believe it or not. There are long term health impacts of people eating lots of processed processed food and no fresh food and not having access to it. But you know what people make a choice to live in a rural area and I see no reason that the government remit needs to get involved with taxpayer dollars to set up transportation systems that you may or may not use to get the to the grocery store and if anything Up By setting up a system where you are relying on the government to transport you to a grocery store for you to do your grocery shopping you are increasingly lead then unreliable on family friends church and local community and I personally think as a conservative one of the worst things. Our government Vermont has ever done in history is In terms of societal impact overall is to decrease people's dependence on and local community structures be they churches civic groups family friends. You can live your entire life Suckling Uncle Sam's man boob and never have to rely lie on family friends or church again and if that paints a horrible picture in your mind you're GonNa have nightmares over at. I apologize but it's the truth. We have way too many. The people who have become dependent on government in rural and urban areas and as a result were seen community breakdown. Because no one needs to be dependent on their community anymore. If everyone's dependent dependent on Uncle Sam or the state of Georgia's taxpayer dollars to improve their existence. Then they have no incentive to build a church community or a local civic community that replaces places church community or keep their family close or incentivized their family to pay play a part of their lives. We got a bunch of people who live in rural Georgia where their kids and relatives have packed up and left left and they have no network of friends or anyone else. They become. UNPLUG from Church and are they hurting. Yes but the solution is not to have the government nanny. Come check on them and drive them to the grocery store. The solution is to help them build relationships within their local community. Incentivize Sinn of is that frankly. It's not even the government's role to do that is the role of local churches but local. Churches have no incentive to do that because the government's already competing. So all of this is to say that that Stacey Abrams that I can look at different issues and we can. We can share a concern for the issue but because she's on the left and I'm on the right. We arrive at different age. We arrive at different solutions. I would not vote for her. She would not vote for me but that does not mean I can look at her and and and think that she's the enemy. No Oh she's just a political opponent she and I disagree I think that her policies would be harmful to the state of Georgia. She thinks policies are awful to the state of Georgia. We can break bread together and we don't talk politics Enjoy others company. I would hope We we did on stage. We had a great conversation and it was great to have someone who can laugh about themselves and The silly things as their parents have done well. She's given this interview now and she has said that she would be perfectly happy to be vice presidential pick that she it would not diminish her ambitions overall to be vice presidential pick. I gotTa tell you. I have a hard time believing that anyone on the democratic side would pick Stacey Abrams to be the vice president. Oh maybe if they WANNA wildcard sensation yes but let. Let's put this in perspective and again I don't mean disrespect here in. No none of nobody get offended on the left now. Who might be listening? But Stacey Abrams was elected a to a State House seat in Georgia and nothing else Mike Pence. Let's as a deeper resume than Stacey Abrams. When it comes to qualifications to be Vice President Tim Kaine on the Democratic side? Did Joe Biden did John Edwards did with John Kerry. Al Gore did with Bill Clinton George H W Bush would probably the most qualified president and vice president in American history. Dick Cheney Cheney with George W Bush had also was also Highly qualified to be vice president. He'd been a member of Congress he'd been a defense secretary he'd been a CEO of a major fortune five hundred corporation Stacey. Abrams rose to be aced a minority leader in a house of Representatives representing a small area of Georgia. That does not qualify one to be vice president if you are to be vice president of the United States the chief criteria for your job is that if the president it kills over dead tomorrow you could become president of the United States in terms of rallying the base perhaps Stacey. Abrams is legit pick. But in terms of persuading Independent that voters that you've made a reasonable pick who could become president of the United States. I don't know that that's the case. And then frankly. There is a liability issue on the Stacey Abram Abram front four Democrats and that is that she has taken some very progressive positions including allowing illegal aliens to vote and things like that and that I think would actually hurt the Democrats evercrack on the campaign trail. When that stuff came out there was a lot of opposition research? The Brian Kemp did not use on Stacey Abrams that if she were the vice presidential pick would come out. I don't think it's going to happen and I do ultimately think that Stacey Abrams benefits by having this buzz about her because she very much wants a do over whether she was around and I don't think she was there was no voter suppression. In fact I see people railing on this article Where she says this Jonathan Cape Art from Washington? Post saying well. She can't win in Georgia. We need a vice president can win. She can't win and Georgia because they'd suppressed. It's the vote in Georgia. Again the the mythology of the democratic side that Stacey Abrams lost because of voter suppression as opposed to just lost because there are more Republicans who turned out out and voted for Brian. Gap they really believe this even factors come out and said there's no evidence of voter suppression. There's no evidence in fact there was a record turnout in Georgia. There's a lot of Republicans voted to But if they if she was to become the vice presidential pick for the Democrats there would be a vetting and I don't know that it would go well ultimately because of her positions. And I I gotTa tell you you and Stacey Abrams I we can disagree on all sorts of stuff off and I think the Democrats would be making a mistake if she were vice presidential pick but I think the buzz helps her because she really wants to run against. Brian can begin. She really does. The race was stolen from her. Even though I don't think it was But you can. You can say all that you take that position you can ultimately arrive at. You know I disagree with this person. But she's actually likable person. Should I know it's heresy in this day and age to say stuff like that but I continue to believe I gotta say stuff like that because I got to remind you that just because you disagree with someone on politics in this country does is not make that person your enemy. It may make them your next door neighbor who you just don't know what their political views are because you're much more interested in on the braves together. which if Stacey Abrams Abrahams were vice president we would vice president who cheered on the braves? How is impeachment play over at CNN? This is Ross Garber I. CNN is legal analyst on impeachment craning officials to American officials and and he's overstepped his bounds including through tweets in the past week So you know that conduct is not okay and it's part of why I've been critical of what the Democrats have tried to do here. This is I think we're seeing not a real effort to remove the president. You know the the Democrats are are moving these articles through they know it has little or no shot Of going anywhere in the Senate and and you know as as you probably remember you know for weeks or months. I've been saying look to take a look look at the actual issues here. We real investigation and this notion by shift that he didn't have time to go to court. You know I think is just nonsense. you know. The one of the reasons why the mcgann cases taken eight months to play out is that The House didn't go to court right away. He issued the subpoena. They did a long long time to try to enforce it. They waited a long time to try to go to court. And so instead we do. Have this rushed impeachment process which is looking like a fast train to acquitted quitting the Senate. He yeah faster into acquittal in the Senate they the Democrats themselves drag their feet on this. We haven't heard from John Bolton who said he was willing to testify if a judge gave the okay and the Democrats did not pursue that in court they didn't go after Getting vote from office of Management and budget budget testify vied. They didn't go after Mick Mulvaney to get him to testify There were so many people. The Democrats did not get to testify. Nor have we heard the whistle blower and and again. I realized Democrats. Say there's no reason to hear from the whistle blower but it was the Democrats themselves who said we were going to hear for the whistle blower and then the news came out of the whistle blower had coordinated with Adam shifts office. And they don't want that guy to be under oath and Serene Green how long he coordinated why he coordinated and what he coordinated about that. That's why they're not calling the whistle blower. It has nothing to do with him. Being revealed or not we pretty much know who the whistle blower is But also there's no protection in the whistle blower statute from being identified and the Democrats crafts. Were adamant adamant that we would hear from the whistle blower that that whistle blower to appear of the secure room. No one would know who the whistle blower was they would be able to do. Republicans would be there all of that. And then suddenly it came out that the whistle blower head coordinated with the Democrats and then all of a sudden. No we don't need to hear from the whistle blower or will of course not because they don't want that under They don't want him under oath answering Republican questions now houses played other this is from MSNBC. Hey there halley. Exactly so perhaps unsurprising. After all these months of being at rallies and talking to the president's fiercest supporters who maintain the president. Did nothing wrong. We caught up with them right after that press conference you referenced earlier and talk to them about their feelings. These two articles of impeachment folks basically were defiant fined and dismissed them which is something we've heard time and time again but the over arching theme has to do with exactly the reason we're here today in Hershey and that is because the the president's reelection campaign these supporters actually believe that being impeachment headlines from today will only harden his support heading into twenty twenty. Take take a listen to what a few of them told US head of the president's rally tonight data. They've been digging at this even before he was elected. So will I think they're just grabbing for straws. That aren't there you can see how upset I am. I'm telling you right now. There are people out here that are selling aged risk here. We are so fed up and so of course we're going to be stronger even coming back to vote for president trump again Either here's here's the political fallout progressives have been rallying consistently against the president but a lot of Republicans or stepping back away pulled pulled out of politics and I suspect we're GonNa see them fired up again for the president in a way they have not previously been and. I don't think that that's going to work the way the Democrats want particularly when the president has a massive war chest to go after the Democrats and they don't have the money to go after him. They're fighting each other right now.

vice president Democrats president Donald Trump Adam Schiff United States FBI Michael Horowitz Ukraine Congress Eric Erickson CNN politico chairman reporter Georgia Donald Trump Muller Hillary Clinton Joe Biden Christopher Steele
Lisa Page in first TV interview speaks out on Trump, Muller probe

MSNBC Rachel Maddow (audio)

47:40 min | 1 year ago

Lisa Page in first TV interview speaks out on Trump, Muller probe

"The show weeknights at nine eastern on. MSNBC onset this hour is going to be former FBI. Lawyer Lisa page who has been in targeted by name and personally and in very personal terms by president trump in a way that almost nobody else he has targeted said anything to do with any of the investigations into this presidency has ever had to deal with tonight. It's going to be Lisa Pages First Television interview since leaving the FBI. She's going to be here. Live on set with us in just a few minutes so I'm very excited about that interview. Honored that she has chosen here to be the place for that first interview. When when you get sentenced for a federal crime one of the things the court gives you the opportunity to do is to have people submit letters on your behalf? Telling the judge that you're a nice person and you're very sorry and as those crimes were a total operation other than that. You're great and the judge should be nice to you in the sentencing and I don't know if all federal judges take these letter seriously when they're submitted in conjunction with somebody's sentencing but some of them clearly do and in the case of President Trump's deputy campaign chair there was also the number two on his inaugural committee Rick Gates it appears that the federal judge who sentenced Gates today did read all the letters that were submitted on gates as behalf and she did take them seriously we at least know that she quoted from them quite liberally when she handed down Rick Gates's federal sentenced today day but the judge and the gates case also did take issue with one assertion that had been made about Rick Gates in one letter that was sent into the court on his behalf and that one assertion was something that the judge plainly just couldn't abide and so she called it out in open court in in a way that I think maybe he gives us our best new idea for a t shirt that could potentially explain the news this week. Here's what the judge said today. In court quote quote one of the letter. Writers said that Gates got caught up in DC political drama but I reject that it is perfectly possible to conduct it yourself with ethics integrity and no hint of scandal even in politics even in Washington. DC even in Ukraine politics corrupt. People people corrupt politics just in case we needed a better bumper sticker. Politics don't corrupt people. People Corrupt Politics Judge Amy Berman Jackson in federal court in Washington today while she was in the process of sentencing gates the deputy chair of the trump presidential campaign and the number two official on the inaugural. It's interesting though. This particular judge hasn't just overseen the Rick Gates case. She has overseen more criminal. The prosecution stemming from the Mueller investigation then any other judge in the country. She's had a whole bunch of them and at this sentencing for Gates today she rips Rick Gates for the severity of crimes. She Praises Rick Gates for accepting responsibility for his crimes and pleading guilty and becoming a wholehearted cooperator with prosecutors. I indeed he has agreed to keep cooperating with prosecutors in multiple ongoing matters even after his sentencing. Today the prosecutors sent information and to the judge about that today under seal because those are still ongoing legal matters that gates is helping with but in addition to doing all that the judge who again has overseen all of those derived prosecutions. Did this sort of remarkable thing in court today at one point in the middle of talking about Gates's case in the law all that sort of direct sir in terms of what kind of sentence he should get aggravating and mitigating factors. And all that at one point the judge basically just stops that part of the sentencing and says. Do you know what I need to us. I need to talk about something else here for a second and it is impossible to forget in this moment that this is the literal literal eve of president trump's impeachment for him demanding that Ukraine. Give him ginned up material to help him in his next election against his Democratic rival while the while the president and the Attorney General the head of the Justice Department are our daily ripping the FBI and ripping the justice. It's just department for having ever investigated Russian interference in the last election. Well the judge who was overseeing more criminal cases that derive from that investigation than any other today had her own moment in court today while she sentencing President Trump's deputy campaign chair. She's sending him to prison right and in the midst of sending him to prison. She says this. It is basically in praise of Rick Gates but but listen to how she says she says quote before forego further to discuss the nature and extent of Mr Gates US cooperation. I think it's necessary to digress a moment to mention the substance of some of his cooperation. Mr Gates it's provided information not hearsay but information. Based on his personal knowledge meetings. He attended conversations in which he was a participant and information that was verified verified with contemporaneous accounts of numerous undeniable contacts and communications between individuals associated with the trump presidential campaign and and individuals associated with Russia and Ukraine. One cannot possibly maintained that. This was all exculpatory information. It included firsthand information. Listen about confidential campaign. Polling data being transmitted at the direction of the head of the campaign to be shared with Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs it included firsthand information about meeting within the campaign concerning attending a meeting with Russians for the soul stated purpose of providing information that could be we used against Hillary Clinton and included firsthand information about claims made by an individual close to the campaign to be in contact with wikileaks concerning the release of emails obtained when the DNC computers were hacked. Gates's information alone says the judge Gates's information alone warranted indeed aide demanded further investigation from the standpoint of our national security the integrity of our elections and the enforcement of our criminal laws. Not all witnesses with knowledge. College did cooperate. And not everyone who cooperated testified truthfully and many communications were lost to investigators because they were deleted or they were conducted on it encrypted platform and not saved but Rick Gates is debriefings his multiple incriminatory bits of evidence on matters of grave and international importance. Ordinance are a reminder that there was an ample basis for the decision makers at the highest levels of the United States Department of Justice the United States Department Department of Justice of this administration she says to authorize and pursue a law enforcement investigation into whether there was any coordination between the trump campaign and and the known foreign interference in the election as well as into whether there had been any attempt to obstruct that investigation and to leave no stone unturned. No matter what the prosecutors determined they had evidence to prove at the end of that investigation for these reasons gates's decision to be honest about what he knew wasn't important public service under difficult circumstances so Rick Gates today in terms of his sentence he got more than prosecutors asked. I four the prosecutors wanted basically a year probation for him because he had been such a good cooperator in so many cases that information about it didn't get a year of probation. He got three years of probation plus on top of that he has to do forty five days in prison. Interestingly the judge made clear at the sentencing today that he'll be allowed to serve those forty five days as in prison on weekends. Only if he wants to he can be a weekender but he does have to serve that time but to to get this rip roaring defense of the investigation into the president and his campaign and to get this rip roaring explanation from the judge of the serious national security risk of inviting some other country to mess with our elections to have that in federal court from the judge was handled all all of these cases and to have it happened on impeachment eve I mean the screenplay writes itself and honestly the scandal itself keeps keeps writing itself as the president hurdles toward impeachment. Tomorrow in the past two days the president's lawyer Rudy Giuliani with whom he carried out this plot a lot to get Ukraine to help him against Joe Biden for the next election. Mr Giuliani over. The past two days has told The New Yorker magazine and the New York Times. He's confessed has to both of them that he led the effort to recall America's ambassador to Ukraine Marie Ivanovich because she was in the way of his effort to leverage Ukraine into doing these as investigations into Joe Biden to help trump in twenty twenty. I believe that I needed. You're a bitch out of the way. There's a lot of reasons to move her. The Washington Post was today reports on the fact that the smears that Giuliani and ultimately president trump himself spread about ambassador. The literally fake made up created out of whole cloth allegations against her. We're not just voiced by the president. And by Mr Giuliani they were spread online by a Russian disinformation network same network that was also active active and the two thousand sixteen Russian online operation to help trump and hurt Clinton that presidential election today in federal court in New York. One of the men under indictment who was working with Rudy Giuliani in this effort in Ukraine says he was working with Giuliani. As part of Giuliani's representation of president trump love love today in federal court in New York was spared by the federal judge in his case who did not exceed the prosecutor's request to take lev off house arrest and instead put him in jail awaiting trial and that judge's decision apparently make sense legally lawyers. I talked to today says it was a predictable result from the judge but in terms of the plot of this impeachment scandal. It seems like a lucky break for Mister Peres. Since his lawyers had to admit in court today that one of the things he didn't disclose the prosecutors ahead of him getting his house arrest bail conditions is that he got this million dollars wired to him from Russia in the month before he was arrested and as they admitted in court today that million dollars came from a Kremlin connected oligarch. WHO's under indictment in this country and is fighting extradition and a multi-million dollar corruption and bribery case who US federal prosecutors say is an upper echelon associate of Russian organized crime? Dmitri Tash is who sent the million dollars the month before he got arrested for. TASHA's the Kremlin's longstanding man in Ukraine. He's been feeding Rudy Giuliani material for this plot that he tried to pull off with president trump and Ukraine. He's under indictment in this country. Prosecutors say he is a huge deal in the Russian mob and for some reason in September of this year he was wire in a million dollars to love while Love was working for president. Trump on this scheme with Rudy Giuliani. The scheme for which the president is now being impeached terms of impeachment. Tomorrow the Rules Committee started meeting early. Today they are still meeting tonight. to try to set the terms of debate for tomorrow's House floor vote on impeachment. As I said they're still meeting. We still don't know exactly how tomorrow is GonNa go procedurally but we believe that it's all going to start at nine. AM In the house. We also don't know if tomorrow's proceedings in the house might go so long that the floor vote might actually have to be held on Thursday. Instead of tomorrow we will have to see how it goes depending on what they ultimately decide and rules and ultimately how it plays out on the floor of the House but this is impeachment eve protests in favor of impeaching president trump were held all over the country tonight from Boston to Saint Petersburg Florida to Lexington Xingtong Kentucky Kansas City Missouri Knoxville Tennessee. From Boise Idaho Houston Texas Phoenix Arizona. Aspen Colorado some of these protests are still going on Josh. Here's nobody is above the law. Projected on Senator Ron Johnson's office building in Milwaukee Wisconsin tonight. This is New York City protesters holding up a giant poster of article. Two section four of the US Constitution protesters in New York marched from Times Square building that sign which features of course to part of the constitution that gives congress. It's impeachment power in Raleigh North Carolina pro impeachment. Protesters came out in large numbers and among other the things they sing Christmas carols. There's a big crowd today tonight in Georgia they are in Atlanta chanting. This is what democracy looks like back out in the snow in twenty eight degree weather in Portland Maine earlier tonight this Louisiana outside Congressman Steve scalise his office saying hey. Hey Ho Ho. Donald Trump has got to go philadelphia. What they're saying is and I say the people you say Power People Power? These demonstrations more than six hundred of them all around the country tonight all fifty states. There's a lot doc going on right now. Needless to say right. We've got these legal developments. In the criminal cases that are all related to the president got the protests all around the country calling for his impeachment achievement tomorrow trying to move lawmakers to support impeachment of the president. The president today sent Cooper Cocoa puffs. Forgive me letter to House Speaker Meeker Nancy Pelosi objecting to the impeachment proceedings in the most bombastic terms imaginable. I'm not going to read it here. You're welcome to on your own time. It's basically six pages of performance exclamation points from the president. The White House counsel's office apparently taking care to put out word tonight that they didn't have anything to do with this letter. This was all him. Our president is two exclamation points. What a porcupine quills? When he feels threatened bristles an exclamation? Point go comes down they come down and you know sometimes it is entertaining sort of from a distance but sometimes it turns out that being willing to ask questions about the President or God forbid investigate investigate this president that sometimes has consequences for you the asker president trump has gone after a whole string of the people who were were involved in the initial investigations into Russian interference in the two thousand sixteen election and the potential complicity of the trump campaign some aspect of that campaign. Fbi I director James Comey the FBI's deputy director Andy McCabe who became FBI director after trump fired comey head of the CIA. John Brennan the Director of National Intelligence. James Clapper copper and those are sort of just the leading lights. The president hasn't just ideally gone after people involved in the Russia investigation though he's been pretty specific and deliberate for it and pointed about it. He explained a few months ago that several people involved in the Russia investigation should be brought up on treason charges and of course treason's capital offense. So he's calling ultimately for their execution one person on that list was Peter Struck. Who until not long ago was the top counterintelligence agent at the FBI? Peter Struck had a sterling career at the FBI including key roles and breaking up high profile Russian intelligence operations inside the United States. He it was the lead counterintelligence agent in the FBI and he worked on the two thousand sixteen Russia investigation. He was fired in twenty eighteen over text messages. He had sent which reflected his personal political views about President trump critical of president trump and frankly critical of other people in politics two now the president hounds him by my name as the FBI sick loser. Peter Struck leader of the rigged witch-hunt investigating this president specifically investigating being the central question of his campaigns potential involvement with the Russian interference and our two thousand sixteen election to try to get him into the White House. I mean that national security purity imperative described in passionate terms today in federal court by the judge who is overseeing more of the criminal trials that have derived from that investigation than any other. The people who have actually done that work people who've actually not just talked about it or supported or criticized it but actually done the work they've all been lined up at the proverbial you'll firing line by this president as he and his supporters both in Congress and in the conservative media. I've just tried to pick them off. Destroy them one by one ending their careers careers one after the other. Deriding them attacking them but the president has reserved particular and particularly sustained ire for one former. FBI FBI lawyer named Lisa page at least page had been a federal prosecutor. She'd worked in the Criminal Division and in the National Security Division of the Justice Department. She worked at the FBI. Be I should add significant roles in the Boston Marathon bombing case and the Edward Snowden case early in two thousand Sixteen Lisa page was working a special counsel to deputy. FBI Director Andrew McCabe. She worked on the Clinton email investigation that same year later in two thousand sixteen she would also play a smaller role in the Russia investigation. And when that became the Mueller investigation she briefly worked on that team as well but in the summer of two thousand seventeen after James Comey was fired by the President as FBI Director. Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel after all that was all underway Lisa Page told at the FBI that she was under investigation herself itself for political text messages in a groundbreaking interviewed Lisa. Page justed with Molly Jong Fast at the daily beast page described viscerally what it was like to have her text messages discovered and investigated by the Inspector General. She said quote at the end of July. Two thousand seventeen I was informed by the DOJ the OJ. Inspector General's Office that I was under investigation for political text messages and honestly at the time. I have no idea what they're talking about and initially. They're very coy about it. They don't tell me much about it. I don't have the first clue what they're talking about. What I do know is that my text messages will reveal that I had previously had an affair? I'm overwhelmed by dread red and embarrassment at the prospect that the Office of Inspector General Investigators. Andy McCabe colleagues. Now no or could learn about this deeply personal secret. Is Molly fast reports quote. Sees me as Molly Jong fast reports page was convinced that she followed all the rules. She is after all a lawyer and knows that she is a restricted employees under the hatch act and therefore can't engage in partisan political activity page says quote and. I know I'm nowhere close to that. I don't engage in any sort of partisan politics at all but having an opinion and sharing that opinion publicly or privately with another person is squarely within the permissible missile bounds of the Hatch Act. It's in the rags. Yeah it says plainly. I'm thinking I know I'm a federal employee. I retain my first amendment rights so I really not all that worried about it but then starts a series of events that are still somewhat mysterious today and there are now the subject of a lawsuit that Lisa Page has just filed filed against the Justice Department and the FBI and as a result of this mysterious subsequent series of events. Lisa pages world gets absolutely turned upside down in a way that hasn't recovered quote a very small number of people at the FBI know about the investigation and it stays a secret for six months and it remains a secret for six months until the day after Michael Flynn pleads guilty then in early December two thousand seventeen the day. After Flynn's play a report comes out of public report comes out about page page being under investigation for political bias and it includes mention of the affair. The affair was not part of the Jesus and not part of their review of her or text messages. Inspector General's office had guaranteed page and Peter Struck that their affair would not be made public but then Washington Post included the Affair Fair in their story. The affair that Lisa page was so horrified might become known to her colleagues was an affair with the senior counterintelligence official at the FBI. Peter or struck who had also been involved in the Clinton email investigation and in the Russia investigation. They had been advised that the affair was not the subject of this Inspector General's investigation and it would not be disclosed. It would not be made public but then there it is in the press. Read that come from then a few days later the night before. But then Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was due to testify to Congress. The Justice Department literally invited reporters to come to the department to view. Luke personal text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Struck three hundred seventy five of those personal text messages. I mean this is the justice. Department's own employees employees and the Justice Department is supposedly in the middle of an investigation into whether these text messages or anything else implicated any wrongdoing in the middle of that ongoing investigation Gatien without any finding of whether there had been any wrongdoing here. The Justice Department spokesperson invited reporters to come to the Justice Department. To look at them. Justice Justice Department just shoveled these texts of their own employees to reporters without context. And of course without the sender's permission which is ultimately Lisa page came to be not just on the list of people. The president wants tried and convicted for treason but also she's the one he calls over and over again. Peter strucks FBI. I love her. The lovely Lisa Page has lover. He mocks her at campaign rallies in graphic language and occasionally in graphic guttural noises to the due to the delight of Fox News at the start of their headline there. Watch trump mockingly. Imitates struck in page during raucous rally. Watch click here. Wait till you get to the part we start grunting. So that's one way to counter program your own impeachment attack and threaten and try to humiliate anybody who was involved in the investigation against you that his brought you to this point. Here's another though the day. The House Judiciary Committee formerly took up the articles for impeachment inquiry. They had testimony all all day long that day. From the Inspector General of the justice. Department Michael Horowitz and you may not have known this but this is amazing tomorrow when the full whole house formerly takes up the articles of impeachment on Impeachment Day in the House. What's the Senate going to be doing tomorrow? Oh at that same time. They're going to be taking more testimony from inspector. Inspector General Horowitz to give Fox News something to cover. Horowitz is fresh off the release of his Report on the Russia investigation which conservative media and Republican looking members of Congress and the White House had desperately hoped we would be damning and terrible for the Russia investigation and for the people involved in it. It is it it is weird and history will reflect this oddity that Republicans have been working double duty during these impeachment proceedings trying to fend off the impeachment but also actively at the same in time with the same energy trying to discredit the Russia investigation right now during the impeachment as a way of both distracting from and trying to discredit the impeachment. It has not worked that way though. Inspector General Horowitz did find that there were problems in the process of applying for one specific kind of warrant that was used against one one person in the Russia investigation but bottom line he also found that the Russia investigation was proper that it was properly predicated and as for the behavior behavior of all these individual people who were involved in the investigation of the president has attacked one by one destroying their careers. One by one. The inspector general found no evidence that political bias of any any kind played any part in the conduct of the investigation and that tracks with an earlier inspector general report into the Clinton email investigation and that one the I found no documentary or testimonials evidence that improper considerations including political bias affected specific investigative decisions in this the report the one on the Russia investigation. The one they're gonNA take more testimony on tomorrow in the Republican controlled Senate during the impeachment of the president. The I found that neither either Peter Struck nor lisa page was in a position to singlehandedly. Make any decisions about that. Investigation and that Lisa page did not work with the team on a regular basis or make make any decisions that affected the investigation. Two years later Lisa page says she is still going through the fallout from this only now. She's decided sided to start speaking for herself. She did that remarkable interview with Molly Jong Fast earlier this month also for the first time. She has opened a twitter account so she can publicly publicly. Say things like this online. When the report finally came out she said quote the sum? Total of findings by Horowitz that my personal opinions had any bearing the course of either the Clinton or Russia investigations zero and zero and then. She concludes cool. Cool Lisa page is now suing suing the FBI and the Justice Department for what she calls a breach of privacy with distributing personal text messages to reporters in the middle of an open investigation. She's also doing them for the that suffering that has followed even though page has effectively been vindicated by the process by two different inspector general investigations. She really is still going through this. She's still target still a target including specifically and personally of the president even as that same president is finally being impeached for what he did. Lisa page joins US here onset next. Hey Everyone Steve Kornacki here. We have heard explosive testimony from key. He witnesses in the public impeachment hearings. So what's next as the case for impeachment been made could the president count on Republican support in a Senate trial. And how could it affect the twenty twenty twenty. Election will every Monday Wednesday and Friday. I talked to. NBC News reporters to answer these questions and more on article two inside impeachment intimate it's an NBC News. PODCAST host. We break down what matters what's next and what it means for our country search now wherever you're listening to this podcast to subscribe for free. Thanks excuse me joining us now here on set for the interviews Lisa page. She's a former. FBI lawyer Special Counsel Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe Lisa page has been the target of unrelenting attacks from president trump and his allies ever since the Justice Department published her personal text messages two years ago. This is her first television interview since leaving the FBI last year myspace thanks very much for being here. Thanks for having me I I want to talk to you about a million different things but let me just ask you if I got anything wrong in terms of sketching what I understand. The Brown brought outlines of your career. There no not not particularly I wasn't I wouldn't want to take credit for Boston or Snowden. I it's really how I met. Andy McCabe Eh. Through the Boston bombing and then through the work post noted in assisting the White House in the post intelligence reforms but I can't say that I played an investigative. Everyone either one of them so you were you. Were involved in re in response to those you were not. You don't want to take more credit than you deserve for having been involved in those invest. That's right okay. Let me start at the beginning given that in particular. Can you tell me how you ended up at the. Let's start at the beginning in terms of how your career started in and why you ended up in the position sure I have always wanted to be in public service as young as fourteen. I kind of knew this was where I was going and I. I was lucky enough to join the Justice Department. Through the Attorney General Honors Program so I was a federal prosecutor for six years but those jobs at main justice. How do you on the road a lot and so oh I was tired of it after six years of kind of constant travel and I knew somebody at the FBI who said come join the general counsel's office and so I did and in terms of the general counsel's office in the kind of responsibilities that you had their ultimately becoming special counsel to Anne McCabe News Deputy Director? How did that sort of trajectory go You know it's kind of like. Oh good news stories. It's part good. Hard working part serendipity posts note in there were so many reforms coming out of the Obama Mama White House that I became the point person for that effort for the FBI. Andy at the time was the head of national security program so anything that the White House was proposing would be different in terms of the authorities. Or how we conducted our business would have affected his work and so we started working very closely together. He you find me trustworthy and reliable and hopefully smart and so he asked me to join his staff by twenty sixteen by the early monster. Twenty sixteen in there on the FBI. You find yourself working on the Clinton email investigation. Can you talk us through what your role was on that what that work is like sore. You're so I was special counsel to the deputy director He of course runs the FBI. He's the COO. And so with respect to both the Clinton investigation but also the other her responsibilities of running the bureau. I tried to serve as his sort of count. Could Council his eyes and ears so I tried to keep both a macro view of all the various things that were are happening at the FBI but also keep my ear to the ground with respect to various investigative steps and and what was coming next one of the things that you described in the interview did earlier. This month with daily daily beast was that you were aware in the context of that investigation. That everything that everybody did that had anything to do with that. Investigation was going to be very closely. Scrutinized was going. That'd be something that was obviously going to be inherently controversial when it came to the decision to make public disclosures about the status of that investigation director Comey Homey criticizing Secretary Clinton. Even as he was announcing there weren't going to be prosecutions. Did you have any role in that or did you have strong feelings about that at the time I did I did. I was definitely only a part of the group of people WHO Director Comey was consulting in terms of what to do and ultimately I largely supported his decision. This was not a typical investigation. This was not on an investigation where the subject was secret and nobody knew this. Investigation was underway. Everyone knew that she was under investigation. Candidate trump was ceaselessly. Oh asking to lock her up at his rallies so the notion that we would say nothing with respect to Choosing not to charge her even though every every person on the team uniform agreed that there was no prosecutable case that was true at the Justice Department that was true at the FBI so we all agreed that we needed to say something thing. There may have been varying differences in terms of how much and how much detail to get into but there wasn't largely disagreement with respect to weather to say something at all and you'll take smelly ended up working on the Russian desiccation deeper into two thousand. Sixteen obviously you were one of the people who was involved in the Justice Department and the FBI FBI in such a way that you knew a lot about both of those cases did you. And the other people involved in those two cases struggle at all with this discontinuity continuity that the Clinton investigation for the reasons that you just described was very public and various steps of that investigation were disclosed to the public had a huge political impact whereas there was a live very provocative very disturbing investigation into president trump and his campaign. Well and that was kept from the public. Did you struggle with with that discontinuity or the fact that there wasn't a parallel they're not at all not at all. The two investigations couldn't be less similar in the Clinton investigation. You're talking about historical events. Three years prior her use of a private email server. That was a public investigation that everybody knew about with respect to the Russia investigation. We're talking about we're trying to investigate. What incredibly hostile foreign government may be doing to interfere in our election? We didn't know what the answer was and it would have been deeply prejudicial and incredibly unfair to candidate trump for us to have said anything before we knew what had happened in terms of the way this played out ultimately. You've become become a poster child along with several of your colleagues for these claims from the president and now increasingly from the current and attorney general that the trump Russia investigation nation was cooked up on the basis of false allegations or even some sort of conspiracy specifically to hurt his chances of getting elected. Now of course just the problem there is that nobody in the country knew about that investigation before people had the chance to vote on him. And I just as an observer I find find that flabbergasting how does it strike you. And how does that comport with your understanding of that process. Given what you just described there is no one on this side effects. Who has any experience Syrian counterintelligence who would not have made the exact same decision? This is a question about whether Russia is working with the United States person to interfere on our election. We were obligated to figure out whether that was true or not and to figure out who might be in a position to provide that assistance in terms of the critique that I just implicitly made that if there had been some sort of conspiracy against candidate trump that could have just as easily been leaked to the public so people would know about that when they went to the polls goals is that a fair critique it is a fair critique but we were extraordinarily careful not to do anything that would allow this information to get out before for. We knew what we had you described as I mentioned this sort of self consciousness around the Clinton investigation that everybody involved was very conscious that everything that was done was going to be. Scrutinized that anticipatory sense of scrutiny as I've talked to James Comey about it seemed to drive some of the decisions in terms of public disclosure disclosure in terms of what kind of blowback the FBI would get given what has happened ultimately to everybody who's involved in that Russia investigation so you look back now and recognize any of the same self consciousness about that. was that the same sense. That this sort of scrutiny or blowback was going to be brought to bear on on all of you I. I wouldn't characterize it that way because this was a counterintelligence investigation first and foremost you know the FBI conducts counterintelligence investigation every day and no one ever hears about them and no one will so. It's entirely possible that this investigation could have ended that way had nothing been found. Had there been no relationship between people on the trump campaign in and people in Russia. It's entirely possible. This could have remained a secret investigation for the very reason that you wouldn't want unfairly prejudiced. If you found if in fact you didn't find find sufficient connections between the Russian Federation and members of the trump campaign. It's not what Muller ultimately found but you you shouldn't assume assume that account until counterintelligence investigation will be made public because the vast majority of them are not have so many questions to ask you about that we're GonNa take a quick break. We'll be right back with Lisa Lisa page former. FBI longer right after this lawyer. Lisa Pay Peter Struck and Lisa page. FBI The I love bread. Lisa page Peter strunk Lisa page. Lisa page you may have heard of her. Who is she to lead? FBI agent the lead FBI lawyer were both biased. Against Donald Trump Lisa page is neither innocent nor victims. Suddenly we have a new victim in all of this. He's he's not really a victim she she brought what she got on herself. This has been going on for two years now. The president and his allies in Congress and particularly in the conservative it of media invoking the name Lisa page as though the name itself is an epithet least pages a real live person who built a career as a lawyer at the FBI and the Justice Department before before she became this kind of target for the president and his allies. She's my guest tonight for her first TV interview since leaving the FBI last year. Thank you for being here and for doing this. Let me ask you about the decision to to do this. given what you've been through the past couple of years wise speak now on your own terms honestly. I just wasn't planning to and I didn't want to. I've have lead an entirely anonymous life and hoped to return to one and when the president finally did that vile sort of simulated sex act in a rally in Minneapolis. I just finally had to accept. It's not getting better and being quiet isn't making this. Go away away and it wasn't working for me anymore since you did the interview with the daily Beast Institute opener public twitter account and been able to make public statements and not not forum the president has not slowed down. He last week at a rally. I believe intimated or said that he didn't know if it was true or not but he heard that she'd had to get a restraining order against Peter Struck down. That's how that all worked out. You've said on twitter that that's ally nothing like that ever happened of course not but If this doesn't slow down the president attacking it was still the right thing to do. I mean it's hasn't changed so I don't see why would continue doing the same thing thing. Yeah at least I have my voice out there at least if you want to respond respond to me instead of this caricature that you've drawn about me. You talk about how you found out and what your thought process was when you learned that these text messages that have been investigated by the Inspector General had not just made their way into public consumption but it actually have been given to reporters by the Justice Department who told reporters that they shouldn't wouldn't source them to the Justice Department. Explain where they got them but it wasn't fact the DOJ who gave them out. That's correct told me how that felt. I mean it's it's really one of the more painful full aspects of this entire two years I mean the president's attacks and assaults are one thing but this is my institution this is my Justice Department betraying us and and you know. There's there's an element of this is a claim that this is congressional oversight. And we had to do it. I have been part of both with these institutions for a long time and I know what it looks like when you're trying to when the department is trying to protect people and protect information and I know what it looks like. When they're not there were plenty of ways to fulfill their congressionally mandated oversight responsibility without politicizing our messages without shoveling them out in the way that they did they did? Wow my speculation is because this was not a great time for the Justice Department you had attorney general sessions constantly beleaguered and being lambasted led by the president for failing to sufficiently protect him. You had Rod Rosenstein going to the hill early the next morning. I think it served a useful foil. One of the things that's happened over the course of these past couple of years that you've been this sort of apogee point in terms of the way the president and his supporters conservative media have gone after you but we've also seen different iterations of it against other civil servants and career career public servants people like Marie Ivanovich and Fiona Hill and Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vitamin and others. Who have popped up in the impeachment investigation as fact witnesses? I wonder if that too has inflected. You're feeling about any of this or if you have any anything that you'd like to say in terms of the way they've been treated I mean it's deeply unfair. We are all public servants the simply flee not the way even with wrongdoing. Even if you think that my my text messages were were a mistake. This is not how public servants should be treated and moreover those institutions should be coming to their defense. We can't control what the President says but sure as the the day is long the journal Bar could say something about whether this was appropriate or not secretary. pompeo could say something about whether these people deserve the land passing that they've they've gotten in terms of the text messages and the allegations that have made against you. You've sort of explained yourself. And putting these those text messages ages in greater context in terms of what they meant and the way they were used against you Can you explain to US tonight. What was cement by for example the insurance policy text message? So this is you and Peter Struck texting about the prospect that president trump is going to be elected the unlikely prospect right. I mean it's an analogy first of all. It's not my texts so I'm sort of interpreting what I believe. He meant back three years ago. But we're using an analogy. We're talking about whether or not we should take certain. Investigative Instigative steps are not based on the likelihood that he's going to be president or not right. You have to keep in mind. If president trump doesn't become president the national security risk if there is somebody in his campaign associated with Russia plummets. You're not so worried about what Russia's doing visa be a member of his campaign if he's not president it because you're not going to have access to classified information you're not going to have access to sources and methods in our national security apparatus so the insurance policy was an analogy. It's like an insurance insurance policy when you're forty you don't expect to die when you're forty it. You still have an insurance policy. Don't just hope that he's not going to be elected. And therefore not press forward of the investigation Asian hoping but rather a press for the investigation just in case he does get in exactly. What about the text message that which you instruct we're talking about your awesome fear that trump trump would be elected and he said No? We won't let it happen. I mean by we. He's talking about the collectively like-minded thoughtful sensible sensible people who were not gonNa vote this person to office you know. Obviously in retrospect do I wish he hadn't sent it. Yes it's been mutilated to death and it's been used to bludgeon institution. I love and it's meant that I've disappointed countless people but this is a this is a snapshot in time carrying on a conversation that had happened than earlier in the day that reflected a broad sense of. He's not going to be president. We the Democratic people of this country are not going to let it happen in in terms of the litigation of this issue. The question about whether or not this as the president and his supporters claim reflected some inherent political bias by you and Mr Struck and that you had key roles to play in these investigations and therefore the investigations by the Inspector General has looked at that. Crib been critical of this expressions nations of of strong political views but also said that there was no indication that political bias affected any decisions in either of these investigations full stop. You responded to on twitter by saying cool cool good luck basically good to know but it will make a difference. It won't make a difference in its two years too late right. It's been three straight years. Here's investigation by the inspector general dozens of lawyers and investigators poring over every investigative. Step that I took every text and every email and they realized what I've known from the beginning which is that. My personal views had no impact on the course of either investigation but to my cool cool point two days later Peter. UC Lindsey Graham in the Senate spent forty minutes reading text messages again. These are three years old. There been been described as immaterial cereal ultimately by the inspector general and yet we're still talking about them talking about them on the eve of the president being impeached. We can't ignore that context context. If you can stay with us. We'll be right back with Lisa page former FBI lawyer we'll be right back soon. This with Lisa page former more. FBI lawyer who has been a favorite target of president trump and his allies for two years now ever since the Justice Department sort of inexplicably publicly released for the personal text messages including messages critical of candidate. Donald Trump and honestly of other other political figures as well. I'M GONNA ask you this in part because I don't have very many other people like an ask this and you can tell me if I'm off base but in May two thousand seventeen. The Russia investigation gets taken over by Muller. You're involved at that point. You served briefly on Miller's team. That's how I came to know your name name. Should we the public understand that. The special counsel's investigation looked at this core. Scary question of whether the president was subject to leverage refriger- influence by Russia or any other foreign force or was that the kind of counterintelligence investigation that you're talking about before which is secret which will never know about which might in fact be ongoing so it's really the former they my understanding and and what the ball describes is that they were looking at criminal activity right so they were trying to determine whether there was a criminal conspiracy to engage in crimes against the United States. They did not look at the counterintelligence sort of relationships betweeen members of the trump campaign because that was a different investigation. Well it was the same investigation at the FBI. I think this was a prosecutorial choice. Made by by the special counsel's office but while it was still at the FBI the two were essentially one and the same we were looking at at both simultaneously. The A special counsel's office as best. I understand chooses to focus on the criminal aspects of that investigation when you what were the circumstances in which she left more investigation. I actually asked to just do forty five days. had been at the first briefing for for Bob Muller when he was first appointed and and he asked me to join the team and Andy was the deputy director or the director. At the time. I said no way I'm not. I'm not leaving and Andy said well. You don't say note above molar caller but I had young kids at home and had already gone through two years of extraordinary circumstances and very long hours and days. And I I knew what a Bob Muller operation like and so I asked to do a forty five day detail return well turned into a a hell of of a change in your life. Thank you for being willing to talk to us about it tonight. The chauffeur first TV interview. I appreciate the trust that it takes to be willing to be here. Thanks thank you Lisa page. We'll be right Baxter with us. Get Your Big Day come in tomorrow. The House is expected to vote on articles of impeachment against President. Donald Trump. Just since we have been on the air this hour the House Rules Committee has decided there will be six hours of debate on the House floor before the vote. We don't know exactly what that will look like or if that will change but our coverage here on this historic day tomorrow we'll start at nine. Am Eastern time. I will see the legal matters. Show weeknights at nine eastern on MSNBC. Hey It's Chris as you know sometimes it's good to just take a step back from the day-to-day onslaught of news and take a broader. Look at the issues. That's what I'm doing each week on my podcast. Why is this happening? We're exploring topics ranging from school segregation to climate change. Well the way that I think of it is climate change will be to the twenty waiting for century. What maternity west of the nineteenth century? It'll be the central subject of questions about economic justice. Everything that you care about in the world will be affected by climate and digging deep with guests uniquely uniquely qualified to analyze issues from mass incarceration to race relations as you know for the first time in our history at the national level whites are on the verge of losing their majority status in twenty many years and I think it's no coincidence that our politics are getting more tribal. Join me for. Why is this happening? New episodes every Tuesday. Wherever you get your podcasts?

president FBI President Trump FBI Lisa Justice Department Russia Ukraine Secretary Clinton US Peter Struck director Rick Gates attorney Andy McCabe Peter congress James Comey special counsel
Another Disgraceful Attack on Trump with a Media Assist # 951

The Dan Bongino Show

58:50 min | 2 years ago

Another Disgraceful Attack on Trump with a Media Assist # 951

"Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show. That's not immune to the facts with your host. Dan, Bongino, five other Dan Bongino, shepherdess, Joe, how are you today? Rip roaring ready to go. Daddy o. Get more dramatic every day. Figure watch her show on on YouTube afterwards and my gosh. Joe's excited to be here today. I gotta stack show for you today. The Muller team embarrassing and defaced themselves in front of the public. Again, this disgraceful growth Ness copperation. Again. I can't say in strong enough terms with the Muller probe anyone out there. Who believes Muller was a good guy a white hat, or whatever you have been grossly misinformed and this team of anti Trump witchhunting hacks is a disgrace and the stunt they pulled last night with this New York Times exactly big big thumbs down with the New York Times. And the Washington Post is abhorrent. I'm gonna tell you exactly what's going on what this leak from the Muller team, the leak is essentially this the Muller witch hunters are now saying well, the Bill bar attorney general summary of our report really does. Doesn't show. How awful Trump was. Okay. That was due to unnamed officials making unspecified claims I'm gonna get into what's really going on and the grotesque conduct of this disgraced absurd. Outrageous pro. All right. Let's get right into today's show brought to you by buddies that filter by according to the CDC about seven million people are getting hit with the cold and flu this year. A lot of people think getting sick has to do with the cold weather. That's not the case, folks. There's a lot of it has to do with being indoors a lot. You spend more time inside exposed to higher concentrations of airborne pollutants. You know, sometimes the Air's not fresh inside your house because you have poor air filters. The air circulation's bad change, those air filters improve your chances against the cold and flu. I'd just got over a cold start by improving the quality of your air with filter by America's leading provider, h vac filters for homes and small businesses their build their great products right here in the great old USA, by the way, this is one of those things easy to kick down kick. The can down the road. Forget about but you got to change those air filters. Go to your computer. Now order your new air filter today. Even if you don't need it, right? This second keep that back up ready to go sign up for auto delivery would filter by and you'll save five percents off your order. These guys are great. They're filters are incredibly price. They've over six hundred different sizes including custom options that ship free within twenty four hours. They manufacture all their filters right here in America. And the you'll save money. You'll save yourself time. You'll give yourself an edge. Just call them few flu season. This is a really great company. I've been with me for a long time. Ladies gentlemen, we all need air filters in a house. I know it's not something on your mind all the time. But let's us companies that want to be here wanna talk to you. This is a really terrific companies filter by dot com. That's filter. B U Y dot com. Do us a favor. Tell him Dan Bongino sent you. When you go over there by your air filters today from great American company produces here in the USA wants to be here. Talking to you that's filter by dot com filter B U, Y dot com. We love filter by okay. Let's get right through it. So dang dang dang dang one. This this graceful grotesque? Here's what happened last time. Watching the news Elena bedridden ready to go to sleep after I'd done this Lou Dobbs hit, and I find out that leaks are coming from the Muller pro began from this is a quote from the peace, folks. Unnamed officials in other words, anonymous cowards would making unspecified claims, here's a headline at the hill. Some Muller team members say the final report is more damaging to Trump than the bar summary suggests new corden to the New York Times, I refuse to put the New York Times headline up because I can't stand the New York Times. It's not a serious news outlet anymore. It is the equivalent of a tabloid magazine. Folks. Here's what's going on right now. The Muller team could not fabricate evidence these were awful horrible actors Muller. Couldn't stand Trump. He picked Andrew Weisman as lead bulldog who hated Donald Trump. He picked to attorneys for the team a genie re and Aaron zebbie one who had served us outside counsel to the Clinton foundation genie re and another one in Aaron Zebedee who was stonning Lee had represented. Justin Cooper, who's alleged to be the guy who destroyed the blackberries. And the Clinton Email case. I mean, could you have all the lawyers and all the world could Muller have picked people any worse. The answer is. No. And he did it on purpose because Muller didn't care about the optics or how it looked. He just cared about going after Trump. Now, the problem Muller's probe from the beginning. Is you cannot fabricate evidence that doesn't exist. You can't folks we don't do conspiracy theories or nonsense here. I think that's obvious for a regular listeners. Muller could not attribute comments to people that they didn't make he can't fabricate. This this pen was used in the signing of a collusion deal between Trump and the Russians and fingerprints are on it. Eventually you'd have to process dependent action get a fingerprint. Okay, it didn't happen Muller's Muller's connivance. And he's not a good guy. I don't like the way you handle this thing at all. But he's not gonna fabricate evidence. He's not stupid. Okay. They didn't have any evidence of collusion. So as we set on on the shows last week in a Monday show, where we put together the time line Muller likely new in July of twenty seventeen that July of twenty seventeen just months after he was hired that this collusion was fake. So they set up an ongoing obstruction probe after that. That's why they ask for the revived scope memo and new responsibilities because they couldn't investigate collusion that didn't exist. This is pathetic. Here's what's happening now Bill bar. The new attorney general who is. Has been doing a really good job before he was selected as a turn general and confirmed by the Senate before follow me here, he writes a memo and in this bar memo. He lays out the case that there is no way Donald Trump based on what he only knew publicly because bar wasn't privy to any inside info member. He was just a civilian when he wrote this. Okay, right bar wrote a memo, he was not under consideration for attorney general at the time, contrary to what moron left this wanna tell you. And in that memo, he lays out the case that there is no possible way. Donald Trump could have obstructed Justice based on what happened with the firing of Jim Komi and the Russia probe. The memo was laid out beautifully sites. Legal precedent. It is a brilliant memo. Follow me here. This is important. Bar is then selected to become the attorney general confirmed by the Senate, he is the attorney general now the Muller probe this is where it gets devious. And Joe I need you to put your antenna on and pay close attention because it doesn't make sense to you. We'll make sense to the audience. We'll do keep in mind, the lead here Muller knows and July of twenty seventeen collusion's a hoax instead of wrapping up is investigation into collusion. He keeps an obstruction probe ongoing to damage Trump as we laid out on Monday. I believe he only stops this case when Whitaker takes over the DOJ Matthew Whitaker's, the acting and Bill bars he AG because he knows now the DOJ is going to hold them to account cool. So for yeah. Okay. Great. Muller has read the memo the bar memo before bars under consideration for AG? He clearly knows that bar knows something that same people know, but the Muller doesn't want out there. What is Muller? No. That the rest of saying America knows that Muller disagrees with Muller knows pursuant to the bar memo that there's a strong likelihood that bar believes his obstruction case into Trump Muller's that is is who we miss garbage. And he knows something else folks, he knows that bar is already on the record having written this down because this memo exists. You you you you there is strategic genius of Bob Muller? And I say genius than a malevolent way. I don't mean this as a compliment at. All right. So what does Muller do remember? He can't fabricate a fingerprint on a pen, the sign of collusion deal collusion's done. So he he's forced in this four hundred page report, which we're going to see soon or portions of it. He is forced in there to acknowledge that collusion doesn't exist. We already know that because bars already quoted the report and summarize it for it's crystal clear. There's no collusion. I don't listen to any. It's in the leftist media that this summary is crystal clear it uses quotes from the actual report. Collusion's debt it's not dead because Muller exonerated Trump. Trump exonerated Trump. There's no. Evidence. That's takeaway number one. The obstruction case. However, you can I don't want to say fabricate evidence. But let's just say Joe, you can massage evidence because obstructions not are black or white crime Bank robbery is show. We agree of Joe robbed the Bank, either, rob dinner. He didn't chose either in the Bank, handling the teller note or he's not right. Obstruction of Justice is one of these crimes when I was with the MVP. We would joke around we had things like this like disorderly conduct. You know, we would jokingly call it piracy on the open seas a joke because it was one of those crimes where it was a judgment call. You know, did a guy engage in disorderly conduct or not Joe. I mean, I don't know it was up to the cops judgment. Right. You know what I'm saying? Oh, totally. You know? Yes. It was disorderly. You may have talked to another cop on this matter. No. Maybe it wasn't this order. In other words, ladies. Gentlemen. Obstruction is the piracy on the open seas of federal law enforcement. It's a judgment call the Donald Trump suggesting to Lester Holt in an NBC interview that after the firing of Komi he knew Russia was a made up story. That's that's the quote, by the way, that you know, this Russia thing was a made up story left. This believe that's obstruction. Same people are like what are you talking about? He fired Jim Komi in in the next sentence says, you know, what I knew this. Russia thing was a made up story. It is a made up story. Yeah. He didn't say he fired. He never ever in that NBC interview said he fired Jim Komi because he was investigating him on Russia. He never that's a leftist myth. Let has been entirely completely debunked. He said, you know, what this Russia thing? It was a made up story. It was a made up story. He's been vindicated. Donald trump. Where am I going with this important now this is take away number two number one Muller did not exonerate Trump collusion? Trump exonerated Trump. There's no evidence number two Muller understands. This is a judgment call. Now rather than making the judgment himself. What does he do? Joe? He leaves it. An open question does not exonerate Trump on obstruction and hands the football over to Bill bar. The attorney general who Muller already knows has a memo out there laying out the case about how Donald Trump could not possibly have obstructed Justice in the firing of Jim Komi. Think about what that does. Now instead of Muller what he's been obliged to do make make a call on the obstruction thing he passes it off to bar knowing the Democrats are going to do what show are gonna immediately accused bar of what a conflict of interest because bars already written a memo, folks, we're following. We're following. We're cool day. You get with Muller dead. Yeah. Instead of Muller doing the right thing and making now making the call on obstruction. He had to make the call on collusion because there was not right. But collusion either happened or didn't it's the Bank robbery of this case, there's a Bank robbery or that wasn't Muller. Cannot make the Bank robbery up on obstruction. He can. So you may be saying yourself at home. Okay. I get it. He passes the football to bar knowing bars already through his memo said that Trump did not commit obstruction, knowing the Democrats aren't going to say, look, look what happened. Look what happened Bill bar already wrote this memo. This is a conflict of interest. Did Trump obstructed Justice? I wanted Pizren you may be saying yourself. Okay. I get that. But why wouldn't Muller just make that call himself right show? I mean, why won't Muller why wouldn't Muller if he wanted to nail Trump on obstruction? Why create this cloud through bar? If Muller could just write the report himself and say Trump obstructed Justice. There's a reason for that too. And this is why these leaks are coming out. Now. Because ladies and gentlemen, if Muller charges Trump or anyone on the Trump team with obstruction of Justice at some point there's likely to be an impeachment proceeding after the president would be impeached. If if that happens or after the president where to leave office, President Trump, the president can be indicted out of office. Meaning what Joe follow me they would have to go to trial. Muller knows the obstruction case against Trump is a complete total loser loser. With an out. There is zero chance in a criminal trial a guy President Trump who literally told Jim Komi, according to comb his own memos to investigate his satellites or people on his team who may have done something wrong. And there is zero chance at the deputy director of the FBI testified under oath in front of congress. So there was no effort to obstruct this investigation. There is era chance when that evidence presented at trial that Muller's team would have won a case against an impeach president was indicted Muller would have been embarrassed which would have done, I know folks were getting into level ten here. But this is really important. The breaking news. I it's critical. What would have happened? Then Joe if the president was impeached because you thought he obstructed Justice game. And then is. Put on trial for obstructing Justice and in the trial. Bob Muller's team gets laughed out of court. Can you imagine the damage done to our democracy? If the Democrats and rhino Republicans were to have impeach the president on an obstruction charge that was summarily laughed out of court. Can you imagine how the American people would feel wait? Let me get this straighten. We elected the president you impeached on an obstruction charge that a federal court mocked openly. And thought was ridiculous. That is why Muller and his team of witch hunting, conniving fools. Did not dare dare make a call on the obstruction thing. They did the most cowardly thing possible. They said, well, you know, we don't have evidence to convict him of obstruction. But we don't exonerate him. Either. Right. Your whole job as a special counsel. Joe was to make a call on this. They passed it off to bar to do extensive political damage to the president because they were too cowardly to charge the president to charge the president after he left office to charge the president and a memo which could be used for impeachment with the crime of obstruction of Justice, knowing they had no case. So they pass it off the bar knowing barred already written this memo and knowing that the cowardly conspiracy theorists. Democrats these chumps like Adams shifty shifty and slimy swale well would run in front of the cameras and say oh bars got a conflict of interest here. Muller left it open on obstruction and bar already wrote that memo. So of course, there's a conflict of interest the president committed obstruction. Not only that he's colluding with bar Elias, Rhodia, some home counties. Thank you, Vince. Now, the leaks make sense Joe. Yes. Yes. Weeks last night. This is the breaking news last night. Yeah. About how people on the Muller team. Unnamed officials cowards chumps I'll name them Jones Coundon jump Lieutenant chump, and corporal chump and sergeant chump in there to unnamed chumps made unspecified claims now if you read the times piece. That. We put the headline up again from the hill that it's very specific about what they say. They say it could be I mean, excuse me. It's very it's not it's unspecific that they say the final report is more damaging to Trump than a bar summary suggests if you read the times piece, they're intimating here. Joe not about collusion. They're intimating that the obstruction thing is damaging ten four. Yeah. Yes. They're not. They're not saying that the collusion. The collusion thing is dead. I can't say this. You must understand this. You can't fabricate a fingerprint on the pen that doesn't exist. There was nothing there. The Muller investigation continued for six hundred days after July of twenty seventeen. Despite the mowing. There was no collusion. They needed to nail on something and they zeroed in on obstruction. That's why they went back to Rosenstein for this revised scope memo. They found nothing on obstruction either. That would stand in court. So they pass the football to bar like cowards, they refuse to make a decision because they lose and trial day, then wait for bar to summarize their memo bar makes a call saying, hey, there's no evidence of obstruction ear, I'm sorry. And then these coward chumps unnamed officials making unspecified claims start to leak to their media people. Joe, you know on the obstruction thing. This makes Trump look really bad. Which does what gets the press people to make the connection? Trump appointed bar borrowed a memo before he was appointed about how -struction couldn't possibly be true. Therefore, Trump had to be colluding with bar. That's why they're leaking this folks if I can just I hate to keep plugging this, but it's super important. So my second book is available in Amazon and Barnes and noble for preorder. I don't mean beat you to death of it working super hard on this. And it matters to me this project. It's called exonerated the failed takedown of Donald Trump by the swamp. I'm telling you, I have some explosive connections on this in a book. And I can't I can't I don't want to give them all up yet. It's like the review for reason, I'm still working on it. But I made a connection today in this morning. That is in this book that's going to blow your mind, and it's going to show. You exactly how awful the smaller probe was. This is the leaks understand so please. If you don't mind picking up, we're trying to get an idea the preorder on how many we should print because it's really been incredible. We were number twelve last week. So if you wouldn't mind picking up, I'm deeply appreciated on preorder, just again, I don't mean to beat you over the head with an I'm very sorry about that. But I'm working really hard on it. And we'd love to get an idea. So we can print just enough copies. But this is critical the leak last night unspecified people saying that, oh, you know, Muller's report is really damaging Trump the obstruction thing they're only doing that to wink in an odd to the media. And there there's conspiracy theorist democrat friends. This is the Muller people, by the way this disgraceful team. Assemble to get them to make the connection that hey, we handed the ball to bar in borrowers already corrupted. They weren't supposed to hand the football the bar. They were supposed to make a call on obstruction. And they didn't do it because they had no case, but they certainly could start a conspiracy theory by leaving it open ended handing it to bar leading bar make the call. And then leaking to the media afterwards with unspecified claims how there's damaging information about obstruction and a report. Now watch what's going to happen next? We have called this thing from day one. Yes. This is a Pat on the back. We have caught this from day one about obstruction as our friend audience archive is Judy as as noted we call this year ago about this obstruction thing. Yeah. How this was going to happen because I had people cue me in this. Watch what's going to happen next? They will release likely in a week or two the Muller report. That's alleged to have damaging information about obstruction. There will be significant reductions in that report. Because in that report there will be grand jury information that they are legally prohibited from putting out there. Watch. What's going to happen next? Mark today. It is now ten thirty or so eastern time. What is it April fourth years? They Mark the date. What's going to happen? Next is even the report issued the Muller report is going to just double down on the exoneration of Trump on collusion. And it's going to have stuff we knew about publicly, the Lester Holt interview and things like that. So the Democrats aren't going to have anything new in the report. But what they will have Joe is a bunch of blacked out reductions, and they're going to say what that's where all the obstruction stuff is folks. But you just can't see it. Watch and what's going to happen? The Muller witch honors these discredited hacks who worked for Muller. These democrat activists who went after Trump on obstruction despite knowing collusion was a fairytale. Will start leaking to the media again, Joe while you know, you didn't see the whole thing, and there's really super extra band Adeyemi. Yada. Yada, yada. Is right, right. Was that Paula? You were a big was that you are big Seinfeld fan. Right. That was an episode, right? The Yatta Yatta tag. It wasn't my wise. Lobbed Seinfeld that show. It's great that. It's classic episodes. You know, I've got him. Did that was one of my favorite George does everything backwards at work? He curses out George Steinbrenner gets a promotion for job. What this is what's going to the Yati? Joe you it's going to be the yada yada, yada, talk point. In other words, the yada yada yada is nothing it's meaningless. In other words, the reductions are meaningless because we haven't seen them. But the Democrats are going to say what you haven't seen is the real evidence of obstruction, which is going to be fed to the media and dutifully responded to by by Muller team, unnamed officials who will say, yes, that's the really bad stuff. This is total garbage garbage extensive garbage time as Marv Albert the old New York Knicks announcer used to say when they were down by thirty in the fourth quarter. We're in an extensive Gerbasi time, folks. I remember that. That they had the center the backup guy. I forget his name, Greg something. That's when he'd come in the game was over Ewing came out of the game. It was done. Market. Mark the show. This is the next step in this disgraceful Muller episode. I'm telling you this second book, I'm writing if viscera the Muller probe like you've never seen. You will never look at this thing the same way again. All right. Today's show. Also brought to you by buddies at open fit. Hey love this program. You want convenience you want to get in shape? You want to be able to do it on your own time your own schedule from your own out. You're doing yourself a huge disservice. If you don't check out open fit. Let me just tell you a couple of the great works. You wanna work out six hundred seconds, try their workout six hundred seconds, you training for a tough mudder or any one of those races out there. They have a tough mudder prep. Course there you will get in shape. Paula was just telling me how much he loves these were you, not miss Paula Bongino. Thank you, right before the show opened fit is bringing you something new it makes it easier to never miss a sweat session lose the commute to the gym let the workout comes to you come to you open. It takes all the complexity out of losing weight and getting fit out of it. It's a brand new super simple streaming service that allows you to work from the comfort of your living room. And as little as ten minutes as programs are terrific. Everyone's bodies are different open fit gets that customizes stuff to you. They've all these personalized programs, which is why it's personalized to meet your needs with custom-tailored, original content. They have amazing trainers in classes open fit classes, or led by some of the most effective and engaging trainers in the world scope your body with Andrea Rogers, founder of the worldwide station. Extend Bahrain worldwide sensation excuse me, or getting crazy good shape but hundred McIntyre name by sports Illustrated's, one of the top fifty fittest, athletes, trainers know, how to get results. Quick super simple. Forget the complexity in stress around getting in shape workout on your schedule. Six hundred seconds with celebrity trainer. Devon wiggins. Esa killer program, by the way Paxton fat-burning muscle, building, a body sculpting benefits of much longer sections into a fraction of a time access at anywhere anytime it on your computer web enabled TV your tablet smartphone. Even Roku lose up to fifteen pounds. It's just the first thirty days, flat, your apps shape, your body, look and feel great open fits changed the way I work out use my code Danby. You could join me on a fitness journey joint. Paula to a personalized just for you again. My co Danby and start using open fit for your journey to a healthy life right now during the open v thirty day challenge. My listeners get a special extended thirty day free trial membership to open it. You lose up the fifteen pounds of thirty days. When you text Dan beat a thirty thirty thirty texts Dan be two three zero three zero three zero text and beat of thirty thirty thirty. You'll get full access to open all the workouts and nutrition information, totally free again, text Dan, be to thirty thirty thirty. You will love it. These are really really high end programs terrific. Okay. I wanted to move on quickly Paul. I know I told you I'd lifted shift a little bit we get that legal insurrection a piece I'm so I've been getting a lot of emails on this secret service story mar-a-lago, and I have deliberately not commented on it until I had the information which again, I can't emphasize enough on this show, folks. I am I have absolutely no desire to be first on anything. I want to be right on everything if possible it will be occasional screw ups. But I waited and I've done my homework. Now, I have some information for you. Here's the story legal insurrection today. A Chinese national was arrested and charged after carrying malicious software into Trump's mar-a-lago mar-a-lago is a beautiful place down here. It's a club that Trump owns it's down. It's about ten fifteen miles maybe twenty miles south of where I live in Martin county, Florida. So the story is this a Chinese national with a computer and some militia software and a thumb drive. Entered into the facility. She was not supposed to be there. She was caught. And she's now being prosecuted by the secret service. There's a lot of misinformation about this, ladies and gentlemen, I'm not paid by the secret service to put out any talking points or anything like that. I'm simply here to deliver to you the facts, here's what really happened. Yes. This was a serious incident being treated by everyone very seriously, I assure you, but. There's some confusion here again. Nobody's happy about what happened. This isn't some kind of you know, everybody's out there. Celebrating popping corks honest off the champagne, but the blame that was instantly thrown at the secret service. I could tell you from experience was ridiculous because I don't think people truly understand how the system works folks just quickly on this. Because I want to move on. I've got a ton of stuff to get through today. But the secret service does not admit people or or keep people out of a site. If they are not a security threat. I cannot emphasize enough Joe, I know you've heard this a thousand times whatever this. We started the show in two thousand fifteen but for some of our newer listeners. I don't think people understand that the secret service is responsible for security. We are not ticket checkers. If the staff or a host committee or someone at Mora Lago who's been authorized by. The staff to allow someone into a site says this person can come in. We make sure they're not a do not admit in other words, they're not a terror threat. They don't have a criminal background, and we make sure they're not carrying weapons debt bats in. Do you understand what we don't do? We don't work there anymore, but having deep body of experience with the service in my twelve years there and having conducted lead advances all over the planet on this. We don't make those calls. It is it is if. Let me give you a quick example is when I was working with Barack Obama Steve. And I mean, this if Barack Obama wants to admit a guy into a site or woman, and that person is is is showing all the signs of being like, not a good person. They're sweating may look nervous. But the staff says to you I want that person in here. I want them to take a picture with the president. They go through a magnetometer they'll go through a checkpoint. We will do the hand held. Well, make sure they don't pop up on any do not admit list. And ladies and gentlemen, dare coming in. This may surprise you. But we don't make those calls. Now, if the person pops up on a felony do not admit list as being an al-qaeda terrorist. We're going to get with the staff, right? Quick and say, hey, buddy. This is a real problem. But ladies, gentlemen, even then on foreign trips. There are people who go into meetings with the president the staff will make the call on where they're questionable. Yeah. And the secret service will say, I don't think this is a good idea. This staff makes the call I say that because the woman mar-a-lago who got in there with the computer in the Mauer. It was not the secret services. Call this staff of the host committee said Blatter end they mistakenly thought she was a daughter of a member, I'm not absolving anybody responsible carrying water for the secrets are had no interest in doing that. I'm just telling you how this works it. If the staff says let them in they get in. I mean, this is one of the few areas of expertise. I'm uniquely qualified in podcasting a conservative talk to giving you input on. There have been many times staff and a host committee, the Obama and Bush administer. Has said let him in right? Like you. Sure. Let are in. All right in the magnetometer turnaround got anything on you, get an ID. I'm just giving you the facts, folks. So you're informed. And the reason I bring this up. I wanna be clear is because the left is again using this amunition to attack Trump do the secrets are low Trump, so disorganized more Lago breakdown in security. Trump shouldn't go to you said two stories are up them yourself. Now, you know, the facts it was a screw up the staff should not have let this woman in. It's clear. She was up to something in there. No good. She was caught. Luckily, she shouldn't have been in the first place. I may be clear. But you need to understand how security works we secure the we're not ticket takers. If you got a ticket, which is a pass from those committee come in. You're in. Simple as that. Don't fall for the media hype. Drew Carey us and more or Lago stupid. Okay. You know, it's a great story. Hat tip to the listeners sent it in you know, who you are a Mabon Mitchell. He sends a lot of stories story from Forbes, ladies and gentlemen, as twenty twenty heats up. You're going to see a renewed push for this absurd. Outrageous, you know, Medicare for all proposal, which is not Medicare for all its Medicare for none. It's government controlled health care for all I want to be crystal clear on that. Here's the story of Forbes by Sally pipes Britain's version of Medicare for all is struggling with long waits for care. Well, it struggling with a lot more. This is a devastating piece. Available in the show notes today. Go to bungee dot com. Please subscribe to my Email list. Email these stories right to you. But read this. It is really good. It's a short piece, but it nails. Why government run healthcare absolutely stinks to the heavens? First this Medicare for all push. Bernie Sanders, comma Harrison, others is a disaster. It is not Medicare for all it is government run health Cam. You may say Joe, why are they calling it Medicare for all then because ladies and gentlemen, the term Medicare in focus groups, generally polls. Well. So instead of calling it what it is a government takeover of health care. They call it Medicare for all thinking seniors that vote will say, well, I like my Medicare. So maybe we'll vote for this plan. Ladies and gentlemen. This is not Medicare for all your Medicare. If your senior we'll be bankrupted by a massive expansion of government benefits to people who can pay for them themselves. Now, let's go to the peace. There were three monster takeaways from this piece, and the lead is clear Medicare for all. In other words, government run healthcare is already being tried in Britain. And it is collapsing on multiple fronts point number one. From the peace waiting lists. Ladies and gentlemen. Look at this snippet, you want government control healthcare, you sure. Nearly a quarter of a million British patients have been waiting. This is unbelievable Joe more than six months to receive plan medical treatment from the national health service. According to a recent report from the Royal College of surgeons the ri- have colleges Sachin. Goes on. This is bad. I should different college. It sounds so official more than thirty six thousand Joe have been intriguing cues lines for nine months or more. People will die folks. Yes. Time. Yes. Birdie people we'll bond waiting lists. You're darn rise two hundred and fifty thousand people have waited six months or more for healthcare because the government's telling them, oh that is an astonishing number. Now, if you're interested in basic healthcare economics Faxon, data in other words, you and I'm not talking about liberals. I'm talking about people who are interested in facts and stuff liberals are interested in emotion. Why this rationing by waiting? Lists is happening is obvious. Joe? Let me explain simple. It's not even econ one a one it's econ zero zero zero zero one in other words common sense. There are two ways to allocate scarce resources a doctor's time medicine. Whatever it may be a hospital bed is a scarce resource. It is not unlimited. Correct doctor has an eight to ten hour workday. His time is limited a hospital has a certain number of beds. Their beds are limited all resources in medicine. All are scarce. There are two and only two ways to allocate hospital beds, doctors time injections, vaccinations, whatever they may be because they are all scarce one is to use the free market to price those items which allows people to work to pay for them. When those things get in short supply prices, go up when prices go up what happens competitors come in. Joe again, this is econ- zero zero zero zero zero one for people who have common sense when prices go up in a free market competitors. Come in Joe and say, wow, those are high prices we can make some money, and they compete with other companies to produce more hospitals and beds, which does what show increases the supply and drives the price down. This is only happened throughout human history with every single item subjected to free market pressure Lasix surgery, plastic surgery, flat screen TV's computers, iphones. Lasers for your shoulder. This thing really helps my show this a laser. I put on my shoulder vitamin B, twelve spray. Go can openers from this is from one of our spa. Answers battle box nail clippers case, you gotta hang now. What else what other items? Do we have? I phones paper made pens Sennheiser as your call some cans normal people. Call them earphones objected that kid Joe's dorm on just joking. My buddy lump Joe, let's see what else. Do we have here? We have a flat screen TV in about two TV folks in the background shirts. Cobra forty seven all of the prices on these items have come down. I can't believe we have to do this. But liberals watched the show can't figure out basic economics all of the prices on these items. Joseph have come down over time if because competitors in shirts, remotes, pens, nail clippers and everything else. Have come in and not allowed one producer to charge monopoly prices. That when the government. How 'bout that? When the government creates a monopoly, there is only one producer and producer of that product is government. Yeah. So the first way is pricing. When the government is the only producer of funds to pay for an item, you have ranting because the price system doesn't work because you can't bid up the price bidding up the price of healthcare is a good thing. Why why liberals all did he just say that because competitors come in and bid the price down? Why do you think plastic surgery is a cost you can go in and have plastic surgery, a Columbia and other places for like a thousand dollars because competitors came in and a free markets that I could do cheaper. It's just hard liberals as this hard for you when the government gets involved, and there is no price control control of prices by competitors. What happens? They have to be rationed the hospital beds. There are no competitors. There are no new hospital beds. So the hospital beds. They have to be rationed. You have a thousand patients who have to fit in one hundred hospital beds. What do you do Joe you rational one out of ten people gets a hospital bed? And usually it's the most connected that is why nine out of ten people Pollock if you don't mind putting up that that screen to get that is why nine out of ten people are waiting on a waiting list. That's why two hundred fifty thousand people are waiting six months or more. Okay. Take away number two from this. Excellent. Forbes piece. I thought you know, you government control medicine. Oh, it's so much better. Gosh, people they love this government control mate. So great. The results are so much better. Really? Because here's a corporate apiece. Unsurprisingly Joe British cancer patients fare worse than those in the United States. Now, only eighty one percent of breast cancer patients in the United Kingdom live at least five years after diagnosis hours that I thought it was wonderful compared to the United States where the survival rate over five years for breast cancer is eighty nine percent eight percentage points higher. How is that? Oh, it goes on just eighty three percent of patients in the UK live five years after a prostate cancer diagnosis versus ninety seven percent here a fourteen percentage point difference. Wow. The NHS Joe also routinely denies patients access to treatment. This is insane. More than half of their clinical commissioning groups, which plan healthcare services within their local regions are rationing cash. Cataract surgery cataracts. Like you'll go blind. They call it a procedure. Joe quote of limited clinical value. Yeah. You know, Joe that eyesight thing is totally overrated limited comeback about like seeing like seeing stuff. Hold on. Let me did Lee. Folks, you need your eyesight this you'll be out a very serious note. Yeah, I had a great aunt Natalie. She was she's since passed my cousin is named after she went blind later in life, and I'll tell you, and I mean, it was devastating and my family. She was I think in her sixties or seventies. Forgive me. 'cause it was young. I was young when it happened. Limited clinical changed everything. I mean, she required care from that point on and she I'm obviously not blind. But she had said to us because obviously she only recite was effected on her. She was fine. I mean, psychologically, there's no mental impairment or anything. But I remember her telling me she almost wish she had been born blind at that point. Because once you our whole life. She'd spent with perfect visual acuity and then lost it. It was devastating for devastating and everyone around her. Are you serious that you think cataract surgery that could blind people's of limited clinical value? Are you nuts? Are these people create this is what you want? Are you crazy? German serious stuff here. This is real cataract surgery. Limited clinical about. Yeah. Folks that I say things way overrated. This is what's coming down the pipeline for the Bernie Sanders Medicare for all people. What a disgrace. Finally, another takeaway from this piece, which is really wonderful again. I can't recommend it enough. And I hope he listened to it. This one involves massive vacancies by healthcare professionals who don't want to work in the United Kingdom. Quote, patients fate will face long, wait times and rationing of care because he NHS can attract medical professionals to meet demand at the end of twenty eighteen they had more than thirty nine thousand nursing spots unfilled. That's a vacancy rate of more than ten percent. Among medical staff, nearly nine thousand posts were unoccupied these shortages could explode in the years to come in twenty eighteen then Royal College of general practitioners found that more than seven hundred fifty practices could close within the next five years. What? Yeah. Why Joe because medical personnel who train their entire lives to earn an income are not in a free market system where their pay and their work schedules are through their satisfaction because they're run by the government. So instead of being able to work out a deal is a nurse with your employer the hospital at a pay package with the hospital. They have to work it out with the g the government, which thinks eyesight is of limited critical value in colleges surgeons thinks it's terrible that these nurses are paid their fair value. So the nurses throw up the double barrel middle finger and say, I'm not working here anymore. I'm not working sixteen hours a day for crappy pay. No, thanks government. Which teams eyesight of a limited clinical value. No. Thank you. So uncertain prising -ly they're leaving. Again, Joe econ zero zero zero one we're not paying people enough. So what are they doing? They're quitting. You know, Joe? Yeah. You and I worked together you work other places, but you work it, you know, when you went I worked out how this was going to work out you we came to an agreement. Right. You said I'll take this. I said well off that's how this works now with the G if Joe worked for the government or Whitney government on a project. The G says, hey, here's what we're gonna pay and Joe's gotta take it because the government has a monopoly on healthcare in the UK, nurses, go. No, thanks key for good by G for by. I always say, gee, a case, you all wonder where that's coming from your G, man, when I worked in the government, everything is shortened, everything is jargon. And the secret service everything in law enforcement for that. Everything's jargon. I there's like code words. They use for everything. I don't know why. It's just the way cops law enforcement v. We are charging everywhere. But so with the government car, you were issued they would call it. The like you taking home the G the G ride. The that was all everybody knew what everybody was talking about. And if you weren't. Outsiders listening to g to heck is he talking about it you getting in getting into cheat and go home. That's that's where that comes from a case, you won't want curious. Okay. Listen, I love this product. This is check this out. You may be like, well, what's that? This is you ever get mad. Thumb you ever home loading your MAG, magazines, you go they're not clips, there magazines only media people, call them clips load on your magazines to go to the range practice with your firearm. And loading them with the thumbs. You get the worst. Meg thumb ever. Not only that it takes forever. You are wasting all of your range time loading max, you need this. This is the elite tactical systems order go to load megs fast dot com and pick this up use promo code Dan for free shipping. What does this do? This is so simple. This is the one for forty five caliber handguns take this side. You opened up your box amunition slide this over the top put this in writing a magazine, Dun, Dun lickety-split. What I that's the whole thing. No more MAG thumb. No more wasted time. Your time at the Rangers value. People spending more time loading MAGS instead of shooting is not helping improve your accuracy and your thumbs. We'll take a beating you know what I'm talking about. There's a better way. I just showed you the loaders things. Fantastic. I've found the solution. This thing's got me over MAGS on. This is the fastest loader ever made. It's incredibly fast seconds. You will be done. Loading your ATS loader in seconds. You don't even have to touch the rounds. Folks. Zip push the plunger down you're done you think loading rounds. One. At a time is the way to go its not the of save you time save your body from all the abuse months. You use it yourself you'll never load the old fashioned slow way. Again. This is the best thirty dollars. You will ever spend on shooting gear, regardless of your experienced ATS loader is the easiest way to load megs and prevent the dreaded MAG thumb ATS makes a universal rifle. Loader pistol loaded for nine millimeter forty caliber forty five and three eighty check them out for yourself. Go to load megs fast dot com that's load MAGS fast dot com and use promo code Dan for free shipping. This is an awesome product can't recommend it enough. And this just in for firearms enthusiasts listening in from California. The longstanding magazine capacity law banning MAGS over ten rounds was struck down last week by federal judge to big win for the second amendment law abiding gun owners everywhere ATS also makes durable and rugged translucent thirty round magazines for Glock MP five and air fifteen there now shipping to California get yours today. I have those and they connect which is really interesting. Keep makes them easier to to load and makes them easier to us store. Okay. Less story of the day. I wanted to go back to an older story, I covered because it is a key theme of book number two. But it's also a key theme related to what I talked about with Biden on Monday show or Tuesday show, excuse me. Joe Biden, and his now what looks like strong evidence of his collusion with the government of Ukraine to benefit his son evidence is in the hill report by John Salman, what am I getting at book number two paints? The dreadful Muller pro which I just viscerally it in the show as an effort to keep the attention on the Trump team, despite knowing collusion with Russia wasn't real because I believe they were hiding collusion with real entities. Joe Biden in the Obama administration would Ukraine and the Clinton team and their collusion with Russia. There is a John Solomon story from the hill. It is from twenty seventeen but this is worth your time. I- reupped in today's show. No, it's the title is Bill Clinton sought State Department's permission to meet with Russian nuclear official during Obama uranium decision. I'm gonna make this quick. But it's very very important. You understand understand? Excuse me, understand the leader. Collusion scandals are very real. They're just not the Trump one Biden Ukraine Clinton Russia Bill Clinton, while his wife is in the State Department back in two thousand and ten there were emails uncovered in this piece that you need to read I will put the couple of screen shots up these emails, but these emails are devastating citizens. United did a lot of work on that. Dave, Dave Bossie, screw the emails are requests from Bill Clinton's people Bill to State Department officials working for Hillary for Bill Clinton to go meet with two Russians, ladies and gentlemen. These two Russians are key figures in what I believe is a massive collusion scandal. That's getting ready to blow quickly hat tip, by the way, Big Hat tip to Peter Schweitzer's, book Clinton Clinton, collusion or Clinton corruption. Peter Sweitzer checkout his book, it's fantastic and John Solomon as well. I don't wanna take credit for their work Schweitzer's hat tip than this John Solomon pieces. Well, but here's the first official, and we have this screen shot. From the help. He's so Bill Clinton staff wants to meet with a guy named Arcadi devore cabbage a top aide to then Russian president Dmitry Medvedev. What wa what do you mean what meeting with Russians now Bill Clinton? So and one of he's one of the highest ranking government officials to serve on Rosatom. Remember that name their board of supervisors this was listed on may fourteen. Twenty ten Email as one of fifteen Russians Bill Clinton wanted to meet with during a late June twenty ten trip. Now keep that up for a second. Keep in mind. This is an Email in late. This is an Email in may Clinton's taken a trip in June of two thousand ten a month later the uranium one deal is approved win October in two thousand ten so after this Bill Clinton staff is in an Email asking to meet with a key Dmitry Medvedev confident who sits on the board of the company Rosatom that wants to buy uranium one nothing to see here. Folks. Don't you worry it goes on in the context of a possible trip to Russia at the end of? June WJC, William Jefferson Clinton. This is the Email is being asked to see the business government folks below with state have concerns about Clinton's seeing any of these folks Clinton foundation forest policy advisor Amitav d'essai wrote to the State Department. Folks, why am I even bring this up because again this book number two it just destroys this collusion, man. So let me be clear on this the whole collusion Russian collusion. Hoax is based on the fact that what that Russians were in the United States and met with Don Trump junior Russia at Trump Tower. That's their entire case there retire cases that this was a suspicious meeting the meeting now the emails row public. Nothing came of that meeting at all we now know that everybody acknowledges that not only that the people meeting with Don Trump junior are in trapping him. They're connected to Clinton people. It's a trap. So just to be clear the left's whole premise, Don Trump met with Russia's Bill Clinton's people are in the emails asking to meet with key Russian officials sitting on the board of a company trying to buy uranium before Hillary sits on a board to approve the same exact sale. Are we serious? Are you left a serious Arcadi divorce vich the guy sat an abortive Rosatom? They're trying to buy uranium one to get access to our uranium supply months later, Hillary State Department, sits on the board that could have mixed this thing and she says nothing. Tell me again. Now, folks, this is important because your liberal friends will say, well, let me tell you the whole show together. Now, the collusion collapsed obstructions gonna collapse soon to despite all that's going on here. And these these these hacks in the Muller probe it's gonna turn to the swallow line of attack show. Well, it may not have been criminal conspiracy with the Russias, but these meetings with the Russians were suspicious. Okay. I'm Eric was the requested meeting with our Katie divorce damage who sat on the board Rosatom, and is a confidante of the Russian president was that requested meeting with Bill Clinton is at suspicious. We'll wait. I'll wait on your answer. We'll give them a little crickets silence from it. Anything? All you got nothing. Okay. Eric, thank you. Thanks for your time. But there's another meet doesn't it send their folks there's another meeting a request for one. This one's even more devastating. They also sent an Email, quote, the second person on the list that caught the attention was Russian businessman, Victor expert, all you've heard that on the show before two days after Hillary Clinton's visit to Russia vessel. Berg was named by Medvedev to oversee a new technology investment project called skulk evolve all boy designed to be Russia's new silicone valley. According to media reports Hillary Clinton had directly discuss the Skoko project what Medvedev and state was whipping up support for it among US companies, creating the appearance of a conflict. She even attended a major event with the Russians to promote the project. We want everyone to help because that's what I think it's everyone's interest to do. She was quoted as saying about the Skoko project, ladies and gentlemen. Bill Clinton is an Email asking to meet with vex Oberg. This guy is running Skoko a Russian Silicon Valley project that is later determined by Intel officials to been an attempt to steal sensitive technology for military. Use Clinton is Hillary's promoting the project the company's going over there involved in Skokie vote donate to the Clinton foundation. Bill wants to meet with the head of Skoko while Skoko is stealing our military technology. And you're telling me, Eric. Well, well, I think the meetings with the Russians were suspicious what about the vaccine Berg meeting, Eric shifty? What about what about Adam shifty shift is that meeting suspicious? Or the requests for. What do I hear? They're joking play that again, I something I played. Yeah. That's right. Credit cards. Yes. Thank you Armacost. Key timing there. Crickets, of course, is going to be crickets so meetings with Russians at Trump Tower that produce no information and the Russians at show up even though they're connected to Hillary in an obvious entrapment Donald Trump, but we know everything about the meeting about that's evidence of collusion worthy of impeachment. But requests for meetings with a Russian sitting on a board of a company wants to buy uranium while Hillary Clinton's on a board that approves it that's not suspicious and meetings for requests for meetings with Russians involved with a military project disguises, a commercial project, Hillary supported and steals, our military secrets no worries at all you worry read the piece it is in the show notes today. It is devastating devastating. All right, folks. Thanks again for tuning in, please. If you don't mind again, pick up my book, it would mean the world to me exonerated, the failed takedown of Donald Trump by the swamp. We're going to have the cover out hopefully by Tuesday on Amazon that you're gonna like it. We're almost done with the book. It is. I very proud of it. I think it will blow your mind even more than book once by so please go pick that up today, Amazon or Barnes and noble, and if you wouldn't mind subscribe to our podcast on YouTube, YouTube dot com slash Bongino. Subscriptions have been through the roof people been watching the video as well. As listening to it on audio on I on I tunes and Google podcast. You can listen on Amazon Alexis while we really appreciate a police. Subscribe at boosts us up the charts, and it's all free. Thanks a lot folks. We appreciate it. I'll see you all tomorrow. You just heard the Dan Bongino show. You can also get Dan's podcasts on I tunes or soundcloud and followed in on Twitter twenty four seven at dbongino.

President Trump Joe Bob Muller Muller Trump president Trump Muller Paula Bongino attorney football Barack Obama Bill bar America United States Russia Ukraine Dan Bongino Bill bar robbery
Ep. 320 - Democrats Worst Week Ever Gets Even Worse

The Michael Knowles Show

48:07 min | 2 years ago

Ep. 320 - Democrats Worst Week Ever Gets Even Worse

"Democrats already in the throes of their worst weeks and eighteen sixty five now suffer a further indignity. A federal court has just invalidated ObamaCare in its entirety Russia collusion as a hoax. Michael Evans is headed to prison. And now the last vestige of Barack Obama's legacy is headed for the dustbin of history. Coincidentally, the New York Times insists this week that in all good all knowing all powerful. God is logically impossible. They make a bad argument. But after a week like this who could blame the New York Times writers for losing their faith all of that and more. I'm Michael Knowles. And this is the Michael Knowles show. This was basically the New York Times is reaction to finding out that there was no Russian collusion. Donald Trump is fully exonerated, the headline bas-, basically might as well have said, God does not exist. Fair enough. I understand we will examine a very bad opinion piece in the times by Peter Atherton. We'll get to that later. I we just need to do a little bit of a round up because I think we're losing some of the good stuff in the craziness of the news cycle. We found out we found out yesterday day before Robert Muller files his report, and it totally exonerates. Donald Trump Muller himself, totally exonerates Donald Trump Russian collusion, and then the attorney general bar and deputy attorney general rod Rosenstein, exonerate, Trump, totally on the question of obstruction. Then that that very same moment. Michael avenue, the Democrats celebrity lawyer, Trump antagonised is arrested for. Extortion. Not twenty four hours later that all happened. Then I was on the air doing Benz radio show yesterday as I'm on the air. There is breaking news, apparently, unrelated, although there are no coincidences these days that the world's fastest melting glacier, which is an ice earn Greenland rather is now growing in size. It is now gaining ice. So as all of this is happening as every aspect of the democrat narrative over the last two years is cracking and falling apart at the very same time. Global warming falls apart to the example, the main. Glacier example, that they're boycotting to as evidence of global warming starts growing ice all over again because all nature is but art unknown to the and then then on top of all of that. A little story comes out the DOJ is officially agreeing with a federal court decision in December that in validates all of ObamaCare. This story is particularly interesting. You'll probably remember the supreme court famously upheld ObamaCare on some dubious reasoning now, the federal government the federal court and the department of Justice are agreeing that ObamaCare is invalid this is going to go to an appeals court, and we'll see where it goes from there. And then and then finally maybe the best news of the week. I'm going to have to check to see if we get any updates on this Mitch McConnell cocaine. Mitch himself is ordering a vote in the Senate on the green new deal of. Oh, how good this is? How could anyone doubt the existence of God? Let's get to ObamaCare. I. And before we get to ObamaCare. I let's make a little money Honey with express VPN, you know, how is that for a tease you just want to. But you gotta wait for one second. This is important, especially these days, especially with lots of hacking, lots of questionable in for things going on with the Russians and the federal government using that cybercrime is something that happens to other people you may think that no one wants your data. Oh hackers. Couldn't grab your password. Your password is password one with a capital p in an exclamation point. No one's gonna guess that. Right. Stealing data from unsuspecting people on public wifi is one of the simplest and cheapest ways for hackers to make money when you leave your internet connection unencrypted, you may as well be writing your passwords and credit card numbers on a huge billboard for the rest of the world to see which is why I decided to take action to protect myself from cybercriminals. I have expressed VPN express VPN secures an anonymous as your internet, browsing encrypting your data and hiding your public the address as easy to use apps that run seamlessly. In the background of your computer, phone and tablet, turning on express. VPN takes only one click. I express VPN allows you to surf on public wifi without being snooped or having personal data stolen, and it's less than ten, sir. Sorry, less than seven bucks a month to get the same express VPN protection that I've got it's rated number one APN service by tech radar has a thirty day money back guarantee. Protect your online activity today. Find out how you get three months free at express VPN dot com slash Michael M, I C H E L E X P R E S S VPN dot com slash Michael for three months free with a one year package. Express VPN dot com slash Michael J L to learn more. How his ObamaCare been invalidated. The news today is the filing of the department of Justice to side with a federal court judge read O'Connor who in December invalidated ObamaCare. So now, this was a district court. That means that this issue is going to go up to the appellate court. You say we've I thought we've already adjudicated ObamaCare. I thought ObamaCare was all ready upheld. Yes, except now circumstances have changed. Now. This decision is going to go up to an appellate court, and it's going up to a very conservative appellate court. So it's going up to the the fifth circuit, which means very likely. This is heading for the supreme court again. What is the argument here? The argument when ObamaCare was upheld. Thanks to that. Trader John Roberts is that the individual mandate, you know, that you have to pay the penalty when you don't have health insurance under ObamaCare. The individual mandate was appropriate to Congress's powers of taxation. That was the argument to uphold ObamaCare now is even a little more clever than that it said, well, the the ObamaCare mandate is a penalty for the purposes of hearing this case, but it's a tax for the purposes of Judah counting this case. And because it's a tax. It's a valid. It's constitutional and it will be upheld. Okay. The argument was always too clever by half. It was a weak argument. However, what has changed? What's changed is that the individual mandate has been repealed? So we've been a little upset with President Trump because he didn't repeal ObamaCare. Right. So you said you were going to repeal ObamaCare. Area two years to do it. You didn't do it. Well, whose fault was that senators like John McCain who said they would vote to repeal ObamaCare, then ultimately voted not to repeal ObamaCare. Very frustrating. However, you'll also remember in two thousand seventeen we got that tax cut. We got the tax reform law from the Trump administration, and what was hidden in that tax law was the repeal of the individual mandate. Now, this seems appropriate because the reason that ObamaCare was upheld in the first place is they said that the mandate was a tax wasn't really attacks. It was a penalty. But by saying it was attacks than in the tax reform law. They get rid of the individual mandate. Okay. What does that do? It removes the taxing mechanism of ObamaCare. So it removes the justification for upholding ObamaCare was constitutional under Congress's powers to tax if ObamaCare no longer includes tax then the chief justification for upholding ObamaCare goes away. Now, the individual mandate is essential to the law. It's inseparable the mandate is the mechanism of the law. You have to make sure that everybody buys insurance or the law falls apart. So now, what is going to happen? Now, the argument for ObamaCare is under the interstate commerce clause or something like that. The argument to uphold ObamaCare is no longer taxation. They'll say, well, it's regulating interstate commerce. But first of all it would have to be regulating interstate commerce that the government mandates which is highly dubious. But but does that argument hold up once you get rid of the taxation? No. So the DOJ has now pounced to use the language of the mainstream media, they see an opening here. They see that this is headed for a conservative leaning appellate court, and they're going in with a brand new argument, and you could see down the line. We're going to see it anytime soon. The overturning of ObamaCare. The adjudication that ObamaCare is unconstitutional. And it's only Tuesday, we got the Muller report on Friday. We got news that there were no new indictments. Which means the rush investigation was just done on Friday. Then on Sunday, we got the letter from AG bar saying that Trump was exonerated on everything. Then on Monday. We got news Michael avenue got arrested and then on Tuesday. We get news that ObamaCare might finally be declared unconstitutional years after it was wrongly declared constitutional. How can this week get any better? How can it possibly get any better? Now, we're still having fun. I told you yesterday said we should have fun. We should celebrate. Then we should be furious. We're still having fun. Look the prospect of losing ObamaCare in its entirety is really really great. But we do have a reckoning coming. There is a reckoning. We should start moving toward the reckoning. The reckoning is in two parts just like the Russian interference was in two parts. Just like the scandal of the Russian collusion hoax investigation had two parts. So reckoning has two parts to the media and the politics. Some people in the conservative wing say that we need to just move on just move on. No more investigations. We've had enough come on. That's no don't be bigger, man. Be a better person. Just take the high road. There is nothing moral about just moving on. There is nothing. On the high road about just moving on. This is not water under the bridge. It would be very wrong to just move on. Because they haven't apologized. And they are just going to do it. Again, all these people who lied through their teeth people who were entrusted with the federal government people who had the public trust people who had the public trust as members of the media lied. They didn't just get it wrong. They lied through their teeth. And they are totally unapologetic about it. And they will do it. Again, here is what we've seen for the last two years. Breaking news bombshell today is a turning point today was historically bad. For President Trump today was a turning point earning point. We're turning point here. The beginning of the end for the Trump presidents have another bombshell Mike Pence might have to assume the office of the presidency mumblings of the word impeachment. Breaking news bombshell out of the White House. I believe this is the beginning of the end identify. It's really the beginning of the end may be feeling the walls closing in on all the walls closing in on him. But walls closing in on him. Bricky news new bombshell on astrologer says this means the beginning of the end for. President Donald Trump will resign from resign. Is this the tipping point? I know we've said it over and over. So we've heard that for two years. Do we think that we're going to get apologies for this? Now, do we think that we're going to get them admitting that they were totally wrong. Do we think that we're going to get some self reflection from them? No, absolutely not what we're getting is a doubling down. We'll get to that in a second. But first, let's make a little money Honey with the way, I heard it with Mike. Rowe if you're looking for more great podcasts to listen to your short on time. You've got to check out the way I heard it with Mike. Rowe this podcast gives a unique take on American history. Each episode is just ten minutes or less the way I heard it is for the curious mind with a short attention span every episode is a short mystery about a famous person or event, you know, filled with surprising facts, you don't know from pop culture to politics from actress to athletes from history to Hollywood, the story is never what you think. In the big reveal at the end is always surprising. It's America's number one short foreign podcast. It's been downloaded more than eighty seven million times. If you haven't checked it out start with episode one hundred how not to ruin your most expensive, sue. Suit this podcast. I was just listening to it. I think it's about eight minutes long, and it's about feeling a little public pressure. It's about a little bit of the intersection between reality and show business. It's about. One of the most pivotal moments in all of history, and it's about how not to urinate on yourself. You're gonna love it. It's a good episode micro is just terrific is. It's a Reaganesque podcast. I just really like it micro dot com slash podcast today. Listen and subscribe to the way, I heard it. M I K E R O W, E dot com slash podcast again, micro dot com slash podcast. Collusion. Collusion's collusion. I sound like Maxine Waters walls are closing in the news is tightening. Donald Trump's going to jail. Don, jR, is going to jail Jared Kushner is going to jail. It's all happening, that's all Russian collusion, collusion, collusion collusion. It's not just that. We're mocking them for their bad reporting. It's that we are fighting. A battle of the truth against pure propaganda. And the propaganda has a lot of institutional support. Because for all of this bunk, garbage, totally fictitious reporting. It's not just that. These guys were on your airwaves and printing your newspapers they won awards for the New York Times. And the Washington Post won a Pulitzer prize for publishing lies. Here is the for their Russian collusion reporting. The New York Times and the Washington Post one Pulitzer prizes. The highest price in journalism for quote, deeply sourced relentlessly reported coverage in the public interest that dramatically further the nation's understanding of Russian interference in the twenty sixteen presidential election and its connections to the Trump campaign the president-elect's transition team and his eventual administration. Well, I can give you all the understanding you need of Russian interference. As it relates to the Trump campaign. There. I did it that was did you catch it? I'll do it again ready. That's it. I'm gonna that's gonna be my next book all the all of the evidence of the Russian interference and collusion with the Trump campaign that won the Pulitzer prize. And this is why it's so important to go after these guys with everything we've got to bring more investigations to bring them before judges and to put them into orange jumpsuits because it's not just a bunch of idiots on CNN. It's not just Jim Acosta. It's not just Ron burgundy on CNN. It is it's a conspiracy. I don't know how else to put it is it a conspiracy. When it's true, we know that the federal government, and the Democrats and the media conspired together to push a lie. We know that for a fact. Who exactly committed what improprieties is the next question. That's what we'll find out with investigations. We know that for a fact with such institutional support all of the print media all of the mainstream media the Pulitzer prizes. All of the accolades of this popular culture, all the way down to our pillars of government. The DOJ the FBI all the way down to the longest continually extant political party. The democrat party all the way down to the Barack Obama administration spying on his political opponents trying to prevent the Republicans from winning the next election. All of these institutions working together to subvert the rule of law in to lie into push lies through their teeth. It would be so wrong to just let this go as water under the bridge. The Washington Post bragged when they won that people that surprise that. It's reporting quote helped set the stage for the special counsels ongoing investigation of the administration. They're bragging that they set up a hoax sham investigation. Now, they're on apologetic. And do you know the CNN president Jeff Zucker came out that he say whoops. We got it wrong. We got it dead wrong. We got it wrong for two years may COPA medical Amax. Culpa? No, this is what he said. He said, quote, we are not investigators. We are journalists and our role is to report the facts as we know them, which is exactly what we did. That sounds like a line from Dr Strangelove that sounds like the punchline of SNL sketch. We're not investigators were journalists. There's no fighting here. This is the war room. That's what he's saying. There's no investigating here. This is a newsroom what what an amazing statement. I don't think Jeff Zucker is an idiot. So I think he's just trolling us at this point. We're not investigators. We're journalists and our role is to report the facts as we know them. How do you know the facts? The way, you know. The fact is that the democrat party sends you talking points, and you spout them shamelessly. The way you're supposed to know facts is to investigate journalism requires investigation. Reporting requires investigation. I suppose broadly, speaking an opinion writer is a journalist commentator journalist, they have to do some investigating have to do a little research. They have to follow. They have to have coherent arguments based on sound premises and evidence you have none of that. And you're proud of it. You're joking about that. You say not no we're investigators. We just we have the facts, but you don't need to investigate the facts. It's like AO see. Listen, it doesn't matter. If you're factually, correct. As long as you're morally, right? That's what we're saying. That's what that's what CNN is saying. Holy unapologetic. Now, they are denying their jobs as journalists. This is what we were talking about yesterday all the various responses to this. This is the example of gas lighting. So we did a good job. We did our job. Oh, you thought. Okay. I see you thought that because we're news reporters that were supposed to investigate the news now. Now, I I get it. I was a misunderstanding. No, we we just say whatever we want to say, we say our truth. I mean, that's basically what he's saying. He's saying our role is to report the facts as we know them. But you have to know them first, and you can't know them if you don't investigate what he's really saying is all role is to report our truth. You can't you don't know our truth. Who were you'd say what are truth is? We're CNN but nana's apples. Remember that stupid commercial? They use this is an apple this is a banana. We're real news. We're bananas here at C N N in in this statement, he's saying no, no, it doesn't matter. It's just our truth or truth is what bananas we love bananas. Bunch of bananas over at CNN. Holy unapologetic now denying it. So I found this this came from the New York Post yesterday. I hope that you've got your brackets this is Muller madness. There's Muller madness right there in the center this Bob Muller's head you see. And then you've got all the brackets. Okay. So we've got the cable news bracket. We've got the network news racket, we've got the the print news over here. We've got the Twitter Roddy over here. And so then they go head to head. You've got Rachel Maddow and Ana Navarro. Okay. You got John Oliver and Donny Deutsch morning, Joe versus John Brennan. We'll get to John Brennan the second former CIA director now he's basically just a flak on CNN. Don, lemon and Chris say, so they're going to go head to head who's going to win between Don lemon, and Chris as Don lemon said the walls are closing in on Trump. But Chris Hayes said a cornered president storms out as the Muller probe closes in which was go then they're going to go head to head. They're going to go and these are four segments distinct segments of people, and it's very telling by the way, the John Brennan is in the cable news segment because these guys are. All working together. That's I mean, that's what's so damaging about this. That's what's so corrupt about how this whole hoax investigation started. It wasn't just the Democrats funding. Some oppo research, if it were the Democrats funding some op research, whatever Republicans fund up research, that's what it is. It's that the Democrats funded op research, and then the op research firm used a foreign intelligence contact who had ties to the US intelligence agencies and the US DOJ had ties to the oppa research firm, not just loose ties ties of marriage that were never disclosed as a conflict of interest. And then once the Democrats paid for that op research using the foreign intelligence, then they tipped off the federal government in the federal government used that bought and paid for oppa research to launch an investigation. Action to serve ale the Trump campaign, and then once they did that other people within the federal government handed it off to the media because they're all in bed together. And then the media created a ton of public pressure into Steria based on nothing that then pressured the federal government and the politicians to launch an even greater investigation that gave us two years of lies that were then parroted again, and again, and again for by the mainstream media seven hundred ninety one consecutive days for an average of three minutes and night spreading a lie a whole investigation and they're still spreading lies and they're still unapologetic. That's what's so corrupt about it. If it were just one segment, you could isolated if it were just CNN, you say, okay, you're a bunch of clowns to an amount that we're just the federal government, you could fire the crooks to. We're just the elected, you know, they're elected vote them out of office. But it's not it's the sick cabal working together. That's the problem. That's why we need the investigation. John Brennan is the cable news talking head or is he former CIA director. I don't know. Certainly never should have been the CIA director. Now, he just goes on as a flak for Democrats. He said that Donald Trump, quote is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Not mincing words, not just making an insinuation, implying something he says Trump, quote is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Now, here's how he explains himself. I'm just curious director. How surprised where you by the findings yesterday by the conclusions that were drawn and. Just curious. Did you receive bad information throughout this process? Like, so many of us did that there was more there than ended up in the report regarding collusion. I don't know if it received bad if mission, but I think I suspected that. There was more than there actually was. And I I am relieved that has been determined that there was not a criminal conspiracy with the Russian government over our election. I think that is good news for the country. And so I still point to things that we've done publicly or efforts to try to have conversations with the Russians that were inappropriate. But I'm not all that surprised that the high bar of criminal conspiracy was not met. I am surprised at that second Portland instruction of Justice in terms of how came out I don't know whether or not by mother wanted the attorney general to pronounce on that issue. Whether or not mother felt that it would be best for congress American people to determine whether the weight of the information indicates that Donald Trump did try to obstruct Justice. So there are some surprises there. And that's why I think getting to the full Mullah report is the best. Way to get some of these if not all of these questions, first of all that lasts party said is just BS. That's just total BS to say that. I don't know if Robert Muller wanted the attorney general to pronounce on the question of obstruction of Justice. He certainly did want bar to pronounce on the question of obstruction of Justice. That's the only possible outcome that could have happened when Bob Muller did not come to a conclusion. So Bob Muller is is analyzing obstruction of Justice. And he presents arguments for both sides. He doesn't complete his homework assignment. He turns it in the AG has to come to a conclusion because. There's there's a potential crime here. If the just said, well, I don't know. I don't know he wouldn't be doing his job because let's say Donald Trump did obstruct Justice then they would have to go after them. Let's say members of the Trump administration did obstruct Justice. They would have to indict them. The AG has a job. The is not a cable commentator. The is not a pundit the has job to do to to enforce the law. So Bob Muller by leaving that open for his boss whose job it is to come to the conclusions. He is saying you have to come to the conclusion because I am not going to do it. So that's just the S. And then he said, well y'all, you know, won't glad glad that Russia didn't take over our country. But, but I still still stand by a lot of what I said, you said Trump is wholly in the pocket of Putin. That was a lie. That was obviously not true apologize or shut up. That's fine. If you don't want to apologize, and you get everything completely wrong. Then shut up because your opinion is worth nothing and your judgment is worth nothing. And you have no humility at all even to admit that. But he can't shut up. So we might want to we might wanna play into that a little bit. That's fine. If he doesn't want to shut up, maybe we should bring him in for some investigations, they'd be we should find out what his role was in all of this. Maybe we should find out. What John Brennan new. Maybe we should find out what the intelligence agencies new during the Obama administration when they launched these illegal. Illegal surveillance of the Trump campaign. Maybe we should find out who was talking to whom that sounds like a good idea. John Brennan doesn't want to shut up fun run. Your mouth buddy run your mouth all the way into an orange jumpsuit. Or at least tell us what we need to know to figure out who was behind this major political scandal. So that we can get to the bottom of this and have some Justice not water under the bridge. Not too bad. They're going to do it again. They're still trying to do it. And there needs to be consequences to show them that they can't get away with these sort of things we got a lot more to get to. We've got Lindsey Graham Bo coming out for a new investigation. We've got a pretty dumb article in the New York Times. And we've got the green new deal, but I go to daily wire dot com. Ten bucks a month one hundred dollars for an annual membership. You get you get the replacement show. You get the Ben Shapiro show. You get ask questions in the mail bag. You get them out. We'll show you get to ask questions backstage. Don't forget to ask questions mailbag coming up on Thursday. And do you get this the most important week for this? Obviously, if you are listening to this right now or watching this you already are a subscriber because otherwise you would have drowned and left his tears, go to daily wire dot com. We'll be right back. By the way, tonight at seven PM Pacific time, ten PM eastern time at the university of Redlands, I will be harvesting delicious, leftist tears. If there are any left to be cried out during my latest speech on my Young America's foundation tour, come on out bring a friend bring some questions and as always bring your empty tumblers. It is going to be a very fun night. So. The media aspect takes care of itself. These guys are bunch of schmucks. They got it completely wrong. They have no credibility. We shouldn't listen to a word. They say all we need to do is tune them out the people we need to investigate or the current and ex government officials who are who perpetrated this hoax who perpetrated this crime. We need to investigate them immediately. Lindsey Graham Bo agrees with me. What makes no sense to me? Is all the abuse by the department of Justice and the FBI the unprofessional conduct the shady behavior. Nobody seems to think this much important. Well, that's going to change. Our hope I've been calling since the end of twenty seventeen or a special counsel to be appointed to look at whether or not the FIS a warrant process was abused for political purposes, whether or not a counterintelligence investigations was opened up. Regarding the Trump campaign as a back door to spy on the campaign. That's what we need to know. We need to know it. I'm glad that grandpa is coming out there and calling for it. That's what we need. I know we why said we're done with the investigations so tedious. It's I know it is I know that's the hard work of government. That's the hard work of politics. And we've just got to do it. Now. Speaking of the hard work of government, some of the lighter and more fun side of this Mitch McConnell cocaine. Mitch is currently it may have already happened calling for a vote for the green new deal. This is what he said I'll try to do it in my best cocaine. Mitch voice, I could not be more. Glad that I know that. No, that's. Sort of like, okay. That's what I imagine. When I see cocaine Mitch just Zad and auto my little, but this is what he said he said, quote, I could not be more. Glad that the American people will have the opportunity to learn precisely where each one of their senators stands on the green new deal, a radical top-down socialist makeover of the entire US economy. And then you know, you had that little cocaine Mitch smirk right there at the end because I just love him so much. So the green new deal proposed by Alexandria, Casio, Cortes, socialist from New York, it would ban planes trains and automobiles over eighty eight percent of the American energy industry, obviously. Because of that on day one that would kill five point eight million jobs, but because it's taking out the energy industry would take away all of the other jobs. Shortly thereafter, it calls to knock down every building in the country and then rebuilt every building in the country within ten years. That's just the beginning. I could go on about this. I'll probably speaking about this at the university of Redlands. Evening. Okay. Cocaine. Mitch says all right Alexandria will bring this up revote when she proposed it. There was a green new deal resolution in the Senate, and it was co sponsored by every. Democrat who is currently running for president from the Senate. Liz Warren, Cory Booker, Kamla, Harris, Bernie Sanders, all see Amy klobuchar all coming out to say. Yes, this is what we want because they're all running to see it was the craziest radical leftist for twenty twenty. So okay. They're all behind it. Alexandria, Kazuo Cortez. This is what she's asking for all these senators. This is what they're asking for so cocaine. Mitch says okay, we'll bring it up for a vote. And do you know what they Alexandria Casio Cortez's furious? She this just broke. I'll just read it straight from the breaking news articles. She said Alexandria Casio is says Mitch McConnell doesn't want to save our planet. He's bringing up her legislation. Says cocaine Mitch thanks on thinks she called him cocaine Mitch. But this Mitch McConnell thinks quote, we can all drink oil in thirty years. What? No, he's not. No, no, no, Alexandria. He's bring up your legislation for vote. No, it's okay now, unless you're legislation is going to have as all drinking oil in thirty years. What Mitch McConnell's doing is that he's trying to rush this Bill to the floor without a hearing without working through committee because he doesn't want to save our planet. She is so upset. Why is she so upset because the green new deal is a joke? And everyone knows it's a joke. Even Alexandrio Kazuo Cortez knows. It's a joke. Even her handlers. No. It's a joke in every single person. In the Senate co-sponsoring knows it's joke. It. You can't do the price tag is ninety three trillion dollars. You would have to cut off all government spending Olga abolish the military off every department of the government, except I guess for the IRS and then. After collecting taxes for thirty years. Maybe you could start to pay for it. Except obviously the economy would crash before them it is not serious, but Eos wrote draft legislation for this thing. It's their Bill that cocaine mitch's bring to the floor and what he's doing is calling out their hypocrisy and their childishness, and they are winding and screaming and crying like children. This is a great bit. I mean, I guess cocaine. Mitch just been waiting for the GOP's greatest week ever. Because you've got boom Russia. Collusion's down. Boom. Trump is totally exonerated, boom. Michael avenue going to jail boom Obamacare's invalidated Bom. Glaciers are growing. Boom. Boom, boom, boom, boom. Get every single democrat Senator on the record for the green deal. It's beautiful stuff. It's gonna come back to haunt them in the general election in twenty twenty cocaine. Mitch does have a view of the long game. That's clearly what he's playing here. This is a really impossible situation in politics. You always wanna put your. Opponent in an impossible situation. And that's exactly what he's doing here. All of these people who have co-sponsored the green new deal draft resolution have to vote for it. They would be rank hypocrites if they don't vote for the green new deal if they vote for the green new deal that actually might help them in the primary though, it honestly, it might not who knows this primary is going to shape out, but it is going to kill them in the general election every GOP ad in twenty twenty. It's going to be about the stupid thing. And they're going to be furious at AO see and this might cut career short too. Which is why she's fighting so strongly against it really really great stuff before we get out of here. I want to one I'd like to thank the good Lord for this wonderful Newsweek that has been so greatly enjoyable and very good for our nation. But I'd also like to call your attention to the New York Times. There was not that in the New York Times by Peter additon. And the op Ed was called a God problem. Perfect all powerful all knowing the idea of the deity most westerners, except is actually not coherent. Okay. If I were the New York Times, and I had a week like they just had I would probably be questioning God's existence too. But this is really important because. Virtually every question, I get in the mail bag. When I go to these speeches is religious in nature either. It's religious in ten general way, or it is directly religious, and it's because you have an entire generation I guess now. Two generations millennials and Zimmer's who were raised without religion who are raised. Religiously unaffiliated, or in some milk, toast, quasi religion, cafeteria, Catholic, whatever they were raised to even even at the most religious. They were raised with the idea that there is a God without wrath leading people without sin through to a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a cross as a theologian who escapes my mind famously said. Most people I think are attracted to some sense of. Meaning they need me. We have this misery crisis in the country. Young people are more miserable than they've ever been anxiety stress suicide -ality role. Skyrocketing teenage suicide is up seventy percent mo- millennials more than any other generation or looking for purpose in their jobs. And we kind of joke about this say shut up and do your job stop trying to make everything about social Justice. But the reason they want that is they don't feel purpose anywhere else in their lives. They need to feel purpose somewhere. They need to feel meaning somewhere, and this crisis is I think, well, it's obviously caused by the devil ultimately. But what it's caused by in a more proximate way is the lack of education, the lack of culture and the degradation of not just our universities. But even our journalists, even our our new sites and this. Is a prime example of that. This is a very bad op. Ed, it's not compelling it deals in a very shallow way with big ideas. And it makes a terrible argument against God. It reminds me of. When Christopher Hitchens, and Richard Dawkins and all those guys had that little publishing movement in the mid two thousands, the new atheists was never really a serious philosophical movement. But it was a publishing phenomenon and they they didn't really make arguments against God. But they wrote books Christopher Hitchens wrote a book, God is not great. And the the book never took on the question of whether or not God is great. He just pointed out that religious groups have done bad things at some points threat history. And this was heralded as some great great mind. Some great work some real powerful thoughts. This is what we're seeing here and stupid things like this encourage people in their delusions that life has. No, meaning and it really exacerbates the problem. So I just want to go through very quickly some of the stupid ideas in this short column and the point out how dumb nail 'cause it's very fun to do that as well with the New York Times. So the column begins if you look up God in a dictionary. First of all, you know, people when you when you were writing or when you were giving a speech or eulogy retest the worst way that you can possibly begin is when I looked up such and such in the dictionary it said, blah, blah, blah. But to me, it means so much more to this merriam Webster's dictionary defines, I mean, this is the cliche worst way to begin a piece of writing or an oration. So no wonder it ends up. In the New York Times. That's just a little bit of advice for you. If you're ever giving a best man, toast or eulogy or something don't do that. Okay. If you don't have God in a dictionary. The first entry will find we'll be something along the lines of quote, a being believed to be infinitely perfect wise and powerful creator and ruler of the universe. Okay. Certainly if applied to non western context that would be puzzling. But in a western context, this is how philosophers have understood God the question does the idea of morally perfect all powerful all knowing God makes sense. Does it hold together? When we examine it logically. Yes. Yes. So you could just stop the article there. But let's go on to see what he thinks. Let's consider the attribute of omnipotence. You've probably heard the paradox of the stone before God, great a stone. That cannot be lifted if he can create such a stone that he's not all powerful since he cannot lift it on the other hand, if he cannot create a stone that cannot be lifted than he is not all-powerful since he cannot create the unlivable stone either way God is not all powerful. So this is something that when freshman students in college smoke pot during their first semester and sit around at night, they think this is really profound. They think this is a really powerful motive what what is actually written. There is more semantically similar to know. The doesn't really mean anything. Now, he acknowledges that in a sense he acknowledges that God cannot do self-contradictory things as Thomas Aquinas acknowledged. But he says other people believe that God can do self-contradictory things Rene Descartes thinks this now what this author doesn't right? Is that actually Muslims think this is well Pope Benedict, channeling Iban Hudson? They muslim. Scholar talks about this. How difference between the God of Christianity? And the God of Islam is that the God of Christianity is a God of intellect and will perfect intellect and perfect will. Whereas the God of Islam is is all will all is. So utterly will full that if all our willed for you to worship idols, you would have to worship deals even though this is self-contradictory. He doesn't go there because that's politically incorrect. So he says, but Rene Descartes thought that Thomas Aquinas was wrong. They like, okay. Yeah. I don't know. Joe blow down the street thinks that dumb as is is wrong too. But Joe blow's a dummy. So okay. He kind skips. That though he kind of he says, okay, it evidently would be a world very different from the world that we currently inhabit if God could create a world in which evil does not exist. But it's a possible world all the same. Indeed. If God is morally perfect. It's difficult to see why he would have created such a why he wouldn't. Created such a world. So why didn't he? Okay, three saying why is there evil in the world? Now, this is the only argument against God that really has any strength whatsoever. And and actually it ends up being an argument forgot he points out that according to Alvin planting a favorite of mine to create creatures capable of moral good, God must create creatures capable of moral evil, and he can't give these creatures the freedom to perform evil at the same time preventing them from doing. So right. The reason that. Evil exists is because we have freedom. Now. Why would God create a world with freedom if freedom necessitates that evil would exist possibly because that's the greatest possible world? This is what we sing on Easter. We say o happy fault that one for us. So great so glorious a savior the fall of man, the pride the original sin results in the fall of man results in all these awful things. But then it wins for first redemption, which is the greatest possible world. Okay. And then this guy says, but it doesn't explain as Darwin noticed why there's so much pain and suffering in the animal kingdom, why there's so much physical suffering caused by non human causes like earthquakes or something the wage. John Milton explains. This is the way the poll explains this which is that the original sin. That ruins perfection doesn't just result in one person's free will affecting only himself. That's not how freedom works. That's not how our actions in the world work. What happens is that when sin enters the world, sin pervades the world and death comes from sin. Evil, all of this pervading the world your actions are not limited to yourself. We know this. If I swing my hand I could knock over my leftist. Here's tumbler, I'd spill the leftist tears all over the ground that would seep in that would create mold someone might walk into the room and breathe in the mold there. These endless number of effects of my evil of when I commit a sin. This is actually what the doctrine of indulgences about. We don't have time to go into that here. But this is a question that many deeper thinkers than this guy in the New York Times have thought about for a long time. He goes on. He says what about God's infinite knowledge, if God knows all there is to know that he knows at least as much as we know. But if he knows that what we know then this would detract from his perfection because there were some things that we know that if they are also known to God would make him a sinner, which of course, is in contradiction to the concept of God one cannot know lust envy, unless one has experienced them. Now, this is not true. I know I can no cancer without having experienced cancer. Doctor knows quite a lot about cancer when he's operating on a cancer patient. It doesn't mean he has to have had cancer himself. One does not need to have experience of these things to have knowledge of these things. He goes on he talks about well he tries to rings this one for a little while that it doesn't do very well. And he refers to logical inconsistencies he says it's logical inconsistencies like these that led the seventeenth century French the illusion Blaise, PASCAL, not really the illusion. By the way. He was a mathematician to reject reason as a basis for faith and returned to the bible and revelation. It is said that when PASCAL died his servant found sewn into his jacket. The words God of Abraham God of is it God of Jacob not of the philosophers and scholars okay? And he's saying because Blaise PASCAL rejected reason as the basis for faith. That's wrong Blaise, PASCAL. Of course, was a member of a largely heretical Christian movement called Janssen ISM was which was roundly condemned. Many times for forgetting things wrong Blaise, PASCAL one of the great geniuses, but can get certain things wrong. I go through this one because it's fun to knock down stupid arguments. Even if we have a real limited time, and we can't go into it in as much depth as we would like to. But I bring this up because this is the point on the media that we've been making all week now in its most fundamental way. It's the point that I repeat again. And again, it's the point that Dr Johnson made all shallows are clear. Shallow thinking is clear. Shallow news reporting is clear. Shallow conspiracies or clear. Conspiracies are so clear. It was so clear that Donald Trump was a puppet of Ladimir Putin to quote, John Brennan was so clear that Donald Trump colluded with the Russians. It's so clear that God couldn't exist. It's so clear. It's in the New York Times shallows are clear. And we need to crack ourselves out of shallow thinking we need to stop being so damn gullible and falling for it. I hope people get that lesson, but they don't, and it's not just on little political scandals big political scandals, which in the grand scheme of things are a little it's on big questions, fundamental questions to we'll see let's hope our eyes are opened. We've got a lot more come back tomorrow. Maybe I'll see at the university of Redlands tonight. In the meantime, I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael null show. See them. The Michael Knowles show is produced by Robert Stirling, executive producer, Jeremy Bori, senior producer Jonathan. Hey, our supervising producer is Mathis Glover, and our technical producer is Austin Stevens. Edited. By Danny d'amico, audio is mixed by Dylan case hair and makeup is by Jessica Ovadia production assistant, Nik Sheehan. The Michael Knowles show is a daily wire production copyright, daily wire. Twenty nineteen. Today on the Ben Shapiro show. President Trump has the best day of his presidency. Maybe an history that's today on the bench zero show.

President Donald Trump The New York Times government Mitch federal government Mitch McConnell president John Brennan CNN cocaine Senate Cocaine Michael Knowles Robert Muller Ladimir Putin department of Justice Donald Trump Muller Barack Obama DOJ
Mueller Wont Give Up On His Witch Hunt # 970

The Dan Bongino Show

58:38 min | 2 years ago

Mueller Wont Give Up On His Witch Hunt # 970

"Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show. That's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan, Bongino, dbongino show producer Joe. How are you today? Danielle. How are you doing? I'm doing. Well. Yeah. Good. So this is barred. I'm sorry. Good bars. Testify it up on the hill right now Bill bar laying into a lot of these democrat hacks up there on Capitol Hill, looking to impune, the integrity of our attorney general I want to get to this because the media freak out last night was priceless. Priceless on Muller's latest attempt to sabotage the Trump presidency. That's all that happened yesterday. Make no mistake I've got some video from CNN of Don lemon and Ted lieu it a full blown panic attack. The both of them freaking out on television shows making stuff up, and I'm going to lay out what Muller's re. Really doing right now. And I want you to read between the lines. This is nothing, but another sick Muller attempt at sabotaging the Trump presidency. It's really disgusting. And gross. When I'm done with this, you if anyone listening had any faith left that Muller was acting benevolently or acting without bias or acting without willful intent to harm the presidency. You are out of your mind. I'm sorry. All right. Let's get to you brought to you by buddies at filter by according to CDC about seven million people are getting hit with the flu this year. Many think getting sick has to do with the cold. But that's not true. We get sick because we spend more time inside and some of the air inside polluted. I'm inside my house all the time. That's why I use filter by I keep my h vaccine in my air clean using American made filters from filter by you want to improve your chances cold and flu season improve the quality of your air with filter buys America's leading provider H back filters for homes and small businesses. Don't kick the. Down the road. Go to your computer. Order yours today. Change those air filters. Three healthier air. Yes. Breathing through the nose out through the mouth, healthier air. Sign up for auto delivery would filter by and you could say five percent of you rotor. They have over six hundred sizes including custom options at ship free right to your door. They manufacture all their filters right here in America. They have been a good sponsor with us for a long time. And no you need air filters. Go take care a filter by take care of us. They love being on the show. They like talking to you. Save time. Save money. Give yourself an edge. It's closed cold and flu season that's filter by dot com filter B U Y dot com filter by dot com. Make sure you tell them Dan Bongino sent you. All right. Let's go. Thing. Ding, ding, ding. Ding minds me the end to rocky three when he asked him to ring the bell Apollo, ding, ding. Okay. So what's going on here? So yesterday in case, you missed the news a Bob Muller in other shameless attack on the presidency history is going to judge this man Muller that is very harshly, by the way. He's disgraced themselves disgrace. This investigation disgrace the country. A letter leaks that Muller sense to Bill bar after bar releases a brief synopsis, a four page synopsis of Muller's report to the press indicating that there's no collusion and that he did not exonerate the president Muller that is on obstruction. But he did not indicate that he wanted to charge with instruction either. Right that letters released March twenty fourth follow me here, folks, Jovtis gets confusing. Stop me because this is important, and it will indicate how the bad faith Muller's acting. So Muller a few days after that March twenty fourth release of the synopsis of Muller's four hundred page report, which Muller indicates clearly to bar is not inaccurate. That's in the New York Times. Washington report. Bombshell last night, right? When Muller releases his accurate, summary, or synopsis, whatever you wanna call it of what's in Muller's four hundred page report when bar releases that Muller sends him a letter apparently objecting to what the media coverage of the report. So let me just give you the lead right now. All right hissy fit. Bob Muller and his deranged democrat witch hunters targeting. The Trump team are upset that the synopsis of his report doesn't lead to Meghan of media coverage. That's exactly what happened yesterday. This guy has disgraced himself. Muller notice in the New York Times report, I think you have to get down to like the thirteenth paragraph or so and the Washington Post report on this thing right about this Muller letter Muller was upset about bars. Characterization of is report you have to get down to the end of the report to find out. That he Muller didn't think the synopsis of his report was inaccurate at all put up that screen shot. Please. From from the from the Washington Post piece, you have to get all the way to the end to get to the part where it actually indicates this from the Washington Post when bar pressed him, whether he thought his letter was inaccurate, again, the letter synopsis sizing Muller's report Muller said he did not he did not think it was an accurate, but felt that the media coverage of the letter was misinterpreting the investigation. So let's get this lead out here immediately. All right. What an unbelievably dishonest disingenuous figure. Bob Muller's become this guy has disgraced himself. He's upset that the media coverage of the synopsis of his report wasn't negative enough on Donald Trump. You know, what let me play this cut from these lunatics on CNN yesterday. Don, lemon and Ted lieu and you'll see how they take a story. That is a non story Muller did not think bars synopsis of his report was inaccurate, all he's just complaining about the media coverage. And then watch the media that Muller's complaining about distorting his report distort, what's in the report about Muller's report card Errol just before the break normally very measured. She said, I'm sick of the lying. I'm frustrated Bill bars been lying for three weeks the Senate, and the congress just get rid of him and bring Muller, and what do you say to that word? I do both certainly wanna give Bill bar that opportunity to perjure himself. But also gonna want to hear from Robert baller. But at this point based on what I know Bill bar needs to resign. He took an oath to the constitution not to Donald Trump. He is supposed to be America's attorney. Not Trump's stooge and because he doesn't understand his job. But he's repeatedly misled American people. He's gotta go notice. Thanks, Ted for some Annette up. Thank you. Ted lieu one of the dumbest guys in congress. No question about it. A guy with the intellectual capacity of a preschooler says, well, we're tired of the lying. We gotta we gotta get this guy up there, the lying what? But he never tells you what the lie is right. What did you do? We miss it. Like, what's the lie? He doesn't tell us. What the lie is. Can you put up the screen shot again from the report the Washington Post report when you get to the end when they're done whining about Muller whining about the media coverage not being negative up on Trump? Let me read to get Muller said he did not feel bars letter wasn't accurate. I folks I'm serious when I says, I'm genuinely. Trying to now I'm trying to give the media some objective sense of like where are they going with this? And I cannot figure out how you would write a story that refutes your own story. One of the Washington Post is clearly trying to attack the president because the report indicated no collusion by saying somehow that bars interpretation of the porpoise inaccurate. While writing a story that says the guy who wrote the report didn't feel that this summary was inaccurate. I don't get it. Now Muller's snake? He's shown himself to be a snake. He's disgraced himself his team disgraced themselves. He's become an embarrassment to the Justice system. Now. He's now whining throwing a two year old hissy fit in a letter because he's upset the media coverage wasn't negative enough. Are we forgetting are? We forgetting the fact Joe that Muller was offered the opportunity to read the letter bar put out the synopsis of the report and Muller declined. Now, why would Muller do that? Oh, oh, this is where it's going to get good. But this is also where it's going to get a little bit complicated. Right. A little bit. It's where I need producer Joe. And Paula the help me here because if I don't sum this up accurately, I'm going to do all of this service. We got your keep this in mind Muller is given an opportunity to review the synopsis bar writes about his report, which is now whining about this leaked letter conveniently leak, by the way, the day before bar goes up to Capitol Hill, but nothing to see their folks, don't you worry? It's Muller's all on the up and up along with his disgraceful team. Right muller. Declines to review the letter, ladies and gentlemen, Muller tried to set bar up and bar smoked him out. Hughes. What's going on behind the scenes and take it to the Bank cash? The check spend the money. Muller hates Trump Muller has lost his marbles. He's not thinking straight. He is single handedly committed to humiliate and Trump and taking down the Trump presidency. Do not take anything. Bob Muller at says seriously. He thought his report would do that the problem inside. The report is Muller is not dumb Muller can't fabricate evidence Muller wrote the report as a roadmap to impeachment. The problem is he thought Trump was stupid. And he thinks he's going to get Trump by doing the investigation on an obstruction charge. Follow me here. Does collusion is a hoax immediately. I'll get to this in a second to Sean Solomon piece. I'll get to this. Second Muller knows the collusion. Hoax is a hoax immediately. So you must be ask yourself. Well, if he hates Trump, then why take on an investigation about something. He knows is hoax because Muller's going to have to be the one to write a report exonerating Trump, which he does later he gets all that think four dimensional chess for a moment. A moment. Muller understands though that if he keeps the investigation open long enough with a recused attorney general Jeff Sessions at the time and a spineless deputy attorney, general and Rosenstein, who's overseeing them that. If Muller keeps the investigation open into the hoax long enough that at some point he believes Trump is going to slip up Joe, okay? Trump is going to slip up by firing someone by getting angry. And he thinks Trump has no control and Trump is definitely gonna fire him or someone else. And they are then going to use that to move forward with impeachment on an obstruction charge. In other words Muller is counting on Trump to do. What Joe to take action? Yes, sir. But what's the problem? Joseph Trump doesn't fall into that trap. No. He granted. Folks. I I was one of the guys recommended he fire Muller a long time ago. I don't run from that at all. But candidly now looking back I was wrong. Tom my business to sit up here and defend to you wrong decisions. My thought because I thought they were going to do is go and run with the Trump kids meant try to go further with the financial stuff. I think they were blocked, but that was the logic behind it. But I don't want to dig into also I'd be I'd be remiss if I didn't tell you that I thought Trump should fire Muller. And at the time, I thought my logic was sound. He didn't do it. He took. No obstructive action at all Muller at this point must be panicking. He knows he's investigating a hoax. He's waiting for Trump to slip up and fire someone and he doesn't Q it. So he keeps the investigation open in perpetuity. Well, what happens? Finally, we get rid of sessions Whitaker gets into office. Whitaker gets into the position as the acting starts asking questions bar comes in as the now confirmed attorney general and starts asking more questions. Hey, what are we doing? Here. Muller now has to wrap this up because Muller knows what he's doing. He's engaged in an ongoing political not judicial not of Justice base fight against the president of the United States. Now rewind a little bit. If that's the case why then there's Muller do chew things or two critical decisions. Here. Why does Muller one not make a decision in the report on obstruction? If you're saying he wanted to hurt the president why not just indicate in the report that the president should have been indicted. It is our decision that if the president was not an office. We would indict him and write it in a report because Muller doesn't have the evidence. Trump doesn't do anything. It's all hearsay talk. Well, he told someone told someone else that he's going to fire someone he told this guy to fired a guy. Well, did he fire him? No. He didn't fire me change his mind. So now, you're in Trump's head your attempted obstruction? That didn't even happen. So point number one. Why does Muller not charge him? If he hates them so much because he can't Muller cannot be humiliated by taking this case to case the court later on. But number two in regards to what happened yesterday. Why does Muller declined the opportunity to review Bill bars letter synopsis ising his report? This is where it gets good. Because this credited Bob Muller who has stained and tarnished his reputation knows full well that Bill bar before he came into the attorney general position in was confirmed wrote an opinion piece indicating that Donald Trump's actions regarding the firing of Jim Komi, we're entirely constitutional and could not constitute obstruction of Justice say well now, I'm confused. Muller knows he has no evidence of obstruction. No criminal evidence to lead to none. So if he punts and the report and puts it in the hands of a guy who's already written op-ed on this. Then he's giving the Democrats ammunition to do what to run with the story that well Bill bar was already tainted advance and already made a decision. This is a political decision. Therefore, Bill bar should resign. And we should move ahead with the peaching. Donald Trump brilliant tactical move sick. Disgusting. Disturbing typical of the Muller team of which authors. But at brilliant tactical move. He must have been sitting around the table with this hack, Weisman this discredited hack. Andy Weissman is chief pit bull and saying to himself guys we have a problem here. The problem. We have is we really hate Donald Trump, and we need this guy impeached, and we need to salvage the reputation of the department of Justice and the F B at that spied on Donald Trump along with our intelligence agencies. We can't do that. Because we have no evidence of this collusion. It was a hoax from the start. The problem is our two year long obstruction investigation on a crime that never happened is also turning up negative as well Joe because we don't have evidence of Donald Trump actually doing anything to obstruct the investigation. Now, we're getting pressure from Bill bar, the new attorney general who refuses to be sidelined in this case, and we don't have the goods. So I'm wondering if there's an entrepreneurial titanium spine the Terni in that group. I doubt it in the team of Muller witch-hunts. There's you in this little hypothetical meeting. We're talking about Joe raises. Hand and says special counsel Muller as it ever occurred to you. If we can't produce the probable cause to charge the president United States with an obstruction charge that maybe it would be in our best interest to do what normal. Prosecutors do in cases like this and just say there will be no charges and move on. No, no, no. We can't do that that won't do enough political damage. So what does he do these deranged hacks on the Muller team? They then make sure they get a letter in writing Joe because you can leak that later who put a letter in writing about the synopsis, spill bar synopsis, you refuse to look at it and review, but make sure you get in writing. Make sure that you disagree with some of the characterizations by the media. Make sure it's in writing. So you can leak it later at an opportune time, maybe the night before the attorney general testifies up on the hill giving what giving the Democrats ammunition for their public hearing in front of all of America to look bar in the eye and attack his character. And by the way, the Washington Post the co conspirators over there. Make sure see you know, what here's the problem to Muller. You may say, well, why would Muller then just not say Bill bars letter was inaccurate because Bill bar quotes Muller's report in the letter. Listen, please. Tell me you're getting this show disappointed. If you don't. Yeah. Yeah. We're good. If Muller's trying to attack him in this letter, just a few days after bar releases synopsis, which he is he wants it in writing Muller because he wants to attack bars credibility to later leaked the letter to congress. Right. So why not just Muller? Skip the nonsense and just writing a letter like really attack him, but Torney general bar. You have mischaracterizing report it is wildly inaccurate week wing congress. Here's this letter. That's going to be by the way, it was leaked right away. Charlie Crist to congressman down from Florida. It's pretty apparent based on his questioning Bill bar in the last hearing that Charlie Chris already knew about the letter. So why not just go for it? Why not just writing a letter Bill bar? You've disgraced yourself you've made wildly inaccurate statements about my report, Donald Trump really is orange men. Bad are bad. Because bar boxed them in again, Muller's not bright Muller and his team of idiots are really stupid. Bar used actual quotes from Muller's report in the synopsis. Boxing, Muller out from claiming that the letters inaccurate really because we have your actual quotes in there, which parts inaccurate the part where you Muller said this. So what is Muller have nothing? All he has is a baseless charge that the media coverage is negative enough. Which he knows the hack media when the letters leaked will want run with to create what more negative media this mazing. This is incredible. Write a letter complaining about not the accuracy of the report the media coverage of the report knowing liberal activists in the media will take said letter, and then mischaracterize what's in your letter about the letter. Like, we're limited crazy town degrades base coaster. Get in crazy town. I'm waiting for Gary Duda show up at the media doesn't even see how they've been played again for the idiots. They are they wait until the end of the story is the letter inaccurate. No. It's not an accurate. There. It is again. But you by the way, everybody needs to go back. And I say one thing Joe you convinced me to talk about this for some reason yesterday's show on YouTube. Didn't do very well. I don't know what it was. And you probably not supposed to talk about. This is the first show we've ever done. It didn't blow it out on YouTube. And I gotta tell you. I'm a little upset. We've put a lot of work at the show. I think it's because the beginning was Sambre on the Venezuela stuff where we kinda. And that's fine. But ladies and gentlemen, please. I'm humbly requests really asking even if you have to skip past this up, please go to the end of the show Joe. And I had a it's some of the best material. Joe, wouldn't you agree? Yeah. It was a lot of fun. Yeah. Oh, it was a blast. Joe's drops episode nine sixty nine. I don't say this for the view. Listen, the Omni are the audio show. Did great yesterday killer numbers. But the please watch the end it is so funny. I mean, I know where it self-praise. Thanks, Joe is not just me Joe is and we were check it out. Did we did a little bit on minimum wage and on don't be that guy? Which just was we loved it. We had a lot of fun. I really love for you ought to check it out. Sorry. I didn't mean to get sidetracked but police check out yesterday show to all right? Let me walk through this now. So another another thing here. I want to explain to you from my prior line of work in law enforcement. Why what's going on here is that disgrace to I'm going to walk to again, the smaller thing, but I want to explain you why we don't do what Muller's doing now in law enforcement what mothers doing now is he released a four hundred page report. With a compilation of what he believes to be facts that hurt the president. Even though he made the decision in his report to punt on actually trying to prosecute the president on obstruction. Ladies and gentlemen. There is a reason. Prosecutors government lawyers DA's ADA's AG state attorney general's. There is a reason. That starts just at show but minute forty if you wanna watch nine sixty nine politics texted me. But there's a reason we don't say if I'm trying to charge Joe with a Bank robbery, and I don't have the evidence show, rob the Bank. There's a reason the prosecutor doesn't release a report on Joe when he refuses to charge him. And the reason we don't do that is simple. I have it. Here is why we don't release evidence. Let's say I do an investigation of Joe, and I've explained this before, but it's important and Joe's neighbor says I think Joe rob the amalgamated Bank on the corner. Oh, and we start an investigation into Joe. And another neighbor says, you know suspiciously. I saw Joe leaving the house with the firearm that want go. Oh my gosh. Another guy comes out and says, you know, I saw Joe that day in his wallet. He had a couple of hundred dollar bills. This is all in the report we released afterwards. Right. The public gets this information even Joe hasn't been charged. And Joe, what do you think the public thinks? Well, that's the guy that we're robbed the Bank. Yeah. They think the worst they think Joe robbed the Bank. Well, what's the problem, folks? Why don't we release reports full of negative information? And Joe there's no question that that would be quote negative information for you. Right. It's not meant to make you look good time. What's the problem, folks? The problem is when the investigators the cops are the federal agents went out and investigated the as the prosecutor what happened we found out. Joe had a firearm that day because he's a concealed carry permit holder in Florida and Joe is carried his firearm every day for ten years yet. It's not connected to the Bank robbery at all. We find out Joe had those two hundred dollar bills that day because he went to an ATM at the local Publix before that. Then we find out that the neighbor who said Joe robbed the Bank had a beef against Joe about their property line. And tree on Joe's property that shading his house and blocking his view. And Joe he wanted to get back at yo for filing a local report with the county Commissioner on the property. I hate that guy. But he's the worst. Yeah. But all of that Joe is completely left out of the report they issued to the press on cost now. Ladies and gentlemen. Does it make sense to you? Why? What Muller did is disgraceful? Key issues. This report about a crime that never happened and an obstruction case on a crime that never happened includes a bunch of negative information about Russians and other things and conversations Trump allegedly had any leaves out all the scope attourney information. Trump didn't fire anybody, right? He leaves out the stuff about Andy McCabe saying there was no effort to obstruct that stuff about Jim Komi. There's a great piece up at the daily caller having the show notes it's from a week ago. Peter her son. Why am I putting this up now because title Mullah report exposes string of anonymously source stories that got it wrong? So conveniently what Muller failed to do during these six hundred and seventy five days he was investigating Joe. He failed to debunk any of these stories, which Peter has sawn in daily caller piece, which will be up in the show notes today any of the negative stories on Trump Mollard and get out in front of the Wiki leaks. Don, jR, story that Deutsche Bank stuff. He leaves it all to fester in the public mental make the Trump team, look horrible. Trump Muller says nothing about it. But the second Joe that bars letter, which he refused to review Muller is released which uses quotes of Muller's own report. The second that doesn't lead to media coverage that hack Muller thinks is negative enough Muller immediately jumps out and writes a letter knowing it'll be leaked to the media to make sure the media coverage is extra super negative devious. What a disgusting disgraceful episode American history. Ladies and gentlemen, I'm sorry. I again, thank you. Bob Muller for your service in the Marine Corps. What you have done to America. In this episode is one of the most disgusting horrific stains on Justice I've ever seen. This is a grotesque abomination. Trump won. He beat you you failed you failed to take down the Trump presidency. Now, you're trying to take down the attorney general. Because you have lost it you have done. The worst thing a prosecutor investigator could do you? Let your personal hatred of another human being blind, your professional Acura n- your Br you do completely went off the rails. And this is your effort. Now your last ditch effort to turn the media coverage back in a negative direction. All right. I'm gonna some this one more time in in kind of a different way. And I wanna move on. And got a lot of talk about. But this is important because this bar hearing today, we'll have some cuts for you tomorrow is going to be another just discussing episode. All right. Today's show brought to you. But you know, what? I mean, Harry's. This is my Harry's razor, you see that nice travel cover laid out is that a beauty or what check that out the nice part about these Harry's razors than I have. I love Harry's. You go to harrys dot com slash Bongino. You can redeem your free trial set today's I only have to shave once these other razors with the flexi balls the moving heads the flux capacitor, it's got a time machine built in a back. They charge you a bowl of for. Harry's doesn't need that. Harry's makes a good quality razor they have their own razor factory. And it's shaved so close. I only need to shave once. I shaved for the morning show. I don't need to shave again at night because this is such a great show. Look at that. It's a beautiful piece of machinery, Harry's can't beat. I brought my own in today. Let's here's the deal about Harry's razors. Join the ten million of tried Harry's. Claim your trial offer today. We're going to harrys dot com slash Bongino. Harry's founders we're tired of paying for razors that at all these gimmicks, and overprice nonsense in it again. We don't need a time machine at razor to racer has to shave. That's it. We don't need to be Tele transported avengers endgame style. Back to get the Infinity stones we just need a close quality shave. And that's what this razor will do for you. Harry's combines a simple clean design with quality durable blades at a fair price. They bought their own world class braid, fracturing, Germany. It's been making quality blades for over ninety five years. They have over twenty thousand five star reviews on trust pilot and Google replacement. Cartridges are just two dollars each Harry's blades. Come with one hundred percent money back guarantee. If you don't love your shave, you will let them know they'll give you a full refund. Here we go get a thirteen dollars value trials that comes with everything you need for a clean, close, comfortable shave awaited. Economic handle five blade razor with a lubricating strip and a trimmer blade, rich, lathering shave gel, nice and a travel blade cover listeners on my show Kimber deem their trial, set at harrys dot com slash Bongino. Make sure you go to harrys dot com slash bungee. You know, redeem your offer let them know. I sent you to help support the show. Thank you. Harry's for being here tonight. Okay. All right. Finally on this mother thing just to prove to you from the beginning that this was nothing, but complete total hackery because you may say oh Muller was a decent guy. I'm hearing this a lot on the news even on on FOX today. I heard a couple people who the fact, well, you know, Muller's and honorable guy he may have been he certainly has an acted honourably in this case, ladies and gentlemen, he knew this whole case was a fraud from the beginning. But if that John Solomon piece from the help, John Salman writes this piece back in January called Pfizer shocker DOJ official warned the Steele dossier was connected to Clinton and might be biased. There's a nugget in this piece about halfway down that just decimates and you should keep this handy. This little tidbit screen shot. This from the peace and keep it on your phone or your computer for your liberal friends who still believe Muller was actually investigating collusion. Here's a portion of the piece they're talking about Bruce or contacts at the Bruce DOJ official Solomon rights, but ORs context about the Steele dossier, by the way, which was a hoax weren't limited to the FBI. He said in August of twenty sixteen nearly two months before the FIS at warrant was issued that he or was asked to conduct a briefing for senior Justice officials. Okay. Standby? Bruce or his wife's worship working for fusion, they produce the dossier. At this point. They must know the dossiers paid for by Hillary because his wife is working there, which should immediately make them suspect to the contents of this fake dossier. So instead of shutting this thing down. What is or do he goes and briefs Justice department officials? But who does he brief all this is where this gets just Rico suave? Those he briefed or that is included Andrew Weisman. Then the head of the DOJ's fraud section Bruce Schwartz CENA mod and who was assigned to work with Lynch as a senior counselor Ahmad and Weisman would go onto work for Muller, the special prosecutor overseeing the Muller probe, ladies and gentlemen. This is August of twenty sixteen Muller's not appointed till may of twenty seventeen the guy the first guy Muller picks for his team. Andy Weissman already knows the dossiers a hoax. He's been briefed by Bruce or. Please tell me again with a straight face. How Muller's a standup guy stand up where? He's not a stand up guy. He puts a guy on his team. Who knows this thing is a hoax and yet he runs with the collusion hoax. Anyway. So step one Muller. I have this written down. I don't want to miss it. Muller knows collusion's a fraud. But instead of doing the honorable thing giving a press conference that we can saying, ladies and gentlemen, we're investigating a hoax based on a political document paid for by Donald Trump's enemies. No. We keeps the investigation open until Bill bars appointed and they shut him down. They actually don't shut them down. I should I don't even want wanna because then they'll give the Democrats were they start asking questions which Muller can answer Muller, basically shuts himself down. What are you doing was probably question number one? Step two Muller, then transitions from collusion, which he knows immediately is a hoax, by the way. My second book. I'm sorry to keep mentioned as but just mails. These guys to the wall. I am so proud of this book exonerated, that's the title. Thank you Paula. It's available on Amazon now nails Muller to the wall by a copy for your liberal, friends and send it to their house. Please highlighted. Muller then transitions to a thought crime. Because he doesn't have a Bank robbery. No Bank has been robbed. He knows. There was no collusion. There was no crime. So Muller needs to keep the investigational investigation open. He transitions to thought crime the thought crime is what attempted obstruction because why Joe there is no obstruction. Trump hasn't done anything. The do matters, not the talk. He hasn't actually obstructed anything Muller does by transitioning to a thought crime that he can continue the investigation indefinitely continuing to use Trump's own statements against him. Anything? Trump says will be painted by Muller as evidence Joe left his house with the firearm. He has a carry permit. You knuckleheads doesn't matter. That's evidence to me. He could have robbed a Bank. You get it transition to what thought crime, and any fact, however dismissed from the actual crime, Trump gave a speech, and he mentioned a Russian guy. There you go always obstructing Justice. This is disgusting. Nature of what Muller did. So I he knows it's a hoax second. He invents a thought crime third Muller finds out after nearly two years six hundred seventy five days that he's never going to get Trump to do anything. On obstruction? Therefore, he figures with in air asking him questions. He's going to have to wrap it up. So he writes a report in the most negative humiliating way possible. But Muller refuses to take a stand on obstruction. Why? Because he won't dare humiliate himself in court if he ever had actually charge Donald J Trump. His case would be laughed out of court just like prosecuting Joe for a Bank robbery based on those three nonsense facts, you made appear as evidence lift that's what you're prosecuting your case on you would be humiliated in court. Muller then punts to bar for one reason and one reason only to politicize this decision. Knowing bar is a Donald J Trump appointee confirmed by the Senate that bar already disagrees about these unique insane legal theories about obstruction. And he knows the media acting like the lackey hat coons. They are for the democrat party will then attack bars credibility. He then conveniently leaks a letter his team to the media the night before bar testifies to discredit bar complaining. The media coverage isn't bad enough on Trump while simultaneously doing nothing to discredit the insane. Remedial media reporting for two years against Donald Trump while Muller knew the whole time, and that daily caller piece all of those stories were false. How do we know he knew because it's in his report? On believable. Unbelievable. What is going on here? All right moving on odd. Some good news you tell us fired up this morning. Some job numbers. Just quickly came out. ADP pathetic job number report is from NBC. This must kill them to put this out. That's why I put him BC's tweet up. There were hundreds of them. I pick them say they must drive them. Remember, the nothing, but Clinton during the private sectors, private sector jobs. Are surging ADP report out today shows the economy added folks, a staggering two hundred and seventy five thousand private payroll jobs in April far more than analysts estimated and the most since last July expecting one hundred eighty thousand but yes that was killing NBC analysts were expecting one hundred eighty thousand jobs two hundred seventy five thousand showing those tax cuts economic reform packages the regulatory reform and getting rid of the red tape is having significant impact on our US economy. If we could just get a hold of the catastrophic debt sich. We were in again, I can't tell you this enough. We'll be looking at an era of prosperity. We have not seen anywhere in human history. Please. If anybody up on the hill is listening get out of your boxes for a minute stand up and do something about this out of control government spending. All right moving on. Venezuela yesterday. I just wanted to highlight this one simple point here. Venezuela's got an ugly. It's. We've seen vehicles running people over firing on civilians. It's a humid humanitarian disgrace. This is what happens with socialism. Am I wanted to make two quick points on this? The first is, ladies and gentlemen, do not let any of the socialism apologised Hollywood elitist animals and politicians who have supported deadly torturous homicidal socialism who have supported this do not let them off the hook. Look at this twenty thirteen tweet from Michael Moore human human disgrace, Michael Moore, producer of socialist propaganda type films. This is from. She's me early twenty thirteen. She's me Hugo Chavez declared the oil belong to the people. He used the oil money to eliminate seventy five percent of extreme poverty provided free health and education for all. Yeah. Michael miss the resulting six years afterwards that political prisoners the human torture, the twenty pounds of body weight Venezuelans of loss due to starvation because government socialized the economy. He also missed the armored vehicles running people over and the shooting at civilians. You may have missed that, Michael. You're a disgusting person you human filth. You are nothing but an apology for apologised for tyranny for tyranny, you are no different than a fascist. People who apologized for fascism are no different than people who apologized for socialists because they both result in the same thing. Oppression death and tyranny. I'm disgusted by you. I'm disgusted by ilk. I'm disgusted by politicians who have done this. You're a disgrace to human. Kind do not let these people off the hook hold them to account on your social media and make sure they're reminded daily about what they did to endorse. A system that runs over people in armored vehicles and crushes the life out of them. It's compresses their lungs breaks their bones their chest and runs them over in the middle of the street. Folks. There is no difference. None as high is pointed out repeatedly in his book the road to serve them, and I kinda work. There is no difference from between the taking of economic liberty and the taking a political liberty. What do I mean by this? The Democrats want to separate the two. Oh, we'll call it democratic socialism. Don't worry you can still vote for people, ladies and gentlemen. It doesn't matter who you vote for when either person man or woman who wins in a socialist system has the right to take your money your labor put you into a lifetime of indentured servitude. Take away your healthcare decisions your education decisions and your basic freedom for objecting to their political policies. There is no difference between the taking of economic liberty using big government policies, and the taking of your political liberty your political. Liberty or ability to vote doesn't mean a damn thing. When the people you vote for every one of them has complete control over your economic life and your freedom and can imprison you and run you over in an armored vehicle when you disagree with them. There is no difference. There is no such thing as democratic socialism. Socialism is a complete control and the subservience of innocent human beings by government. Bureaucrats put in power to terrorize you. Whether you vote for them or not while they terrorize you and beat you to death is irrelevant. There are no change agents and socialism, there are despots and tyrants. A ballot doesn't make that go away. Me say, well, what do you mean, Dan, you can vote? That's what happened in Venezuela. And what and what Madero do Medeiros stacks about it? It doesn't matter. If you get to vote, what did the Russians used to say the Soviets? Joe it matters. Who counts the votes? And they always seem to magically count the votes for them. Stop allowing the Democrats to convince you that there is a distinction between economic liberty and political liberty. Are you wanting this clear what I'm telling you Christian Democrats in congress, the radical leftist wants you to believe that empowering big government over your healthcare Medicare for all empowering big government over your money. Ninety percent tax rates Hooley in Castro proposed empowering them over your kids public schools. No school choice. They want you to believe that is separate and distinct Joe from political liberty and that you'll still be free because you can pick your leaders. That's not the way this works. When you forfeit your freedom, the ballot boxes meaningless. There is no difference between economic and political liberty when you forfeit away, your money, your health care, your education, and you're very right to assemble an object to a government for the people. What results is people being run over on the streets by armored vehicles by the socialists, tyrants, in charge who count the votes. That's all that matters. Taxes are not just about money. Not about the rich getting to keep more money. Healthcare, and you controlling your healthcare is not just about you. Getting a hip replacement school choice is not just about education for struggling kids in Appalachian intercity communities. It's about freedom and the essence of freedom and protecting freedoms freedom to freedoms to dictate. What road you choose to walk down instead of one the government dictates for you once you forfeit those things away piecemeal a little bit of your healthcare here. A lot of bit of your education here a little bit more of your money here. The ballot box becomes entirely irrelevant. Power corrupts is Lord Acton said absolute power corrupts, absolutely. There is no emergency brake on power. If you allow these people to whittle away your freedoms one by one. What's happening in Venezuela? Right now could very well happen here or anywhere else. If you put socialists in charge. This is not a cautionary tale. Folks, it is. But it's an account of history every place, we've put socialist, tyrants and charge. It has resulted in death and destruction. There is no democratic. So what about Sweden Sweden is a free market economy? You knucklehead. Oh my gosh. It is not a socialist country. Unbelievable. Why don't we get a hold the AO, see and Sanders and Michael Moore, and Sean Penn how are these people held accountable for the death and destruction that they endorsed. Well, it's not that one we endorse real socialism that Israel socialism people being run over by an armored car that Israel socialism. Speaking of which more knucklehead policy so Kirsten gillibrand democrat Senator from New York who pretended at one point to be a moderate to get elected by upstate New Yorkers when she needed some political votes. She's now running for president or that you'd never know. She's appalling at negative sixty two percent, which is impossible. I think it was even possible to pull Negga. How do you pull negative has anything? How do you do that? I'm kidding. Of course polling appalling it about zero. Negative. How do you pull it? It's like bowling negative. You Paul someone? You ask him who they'd support anybody this person? I will absolutely not support no matter. What if I take my name off this list, and whatever call me again, that'd be negative support vote Kirsten gillibrand. Right. They want to they want to rescind their votes, that's a negative. They go into the local port of elections after voting by mail. Can I have that back, please? I wanna Burnett. So that's not how it works. I this is making vote for Kirsten gillibrand take lifeboat bags. So she's polling nowhere. So she's getting desperate. So she comes out with this ridiculous plan and tie in this together. Of course, I try to. Put threads throughout the show to make. It seem somewhat continuous. This is the new socialist plan Joe democracy dollars. She calls them. Gillibrand plans to give every voter six hundred dollars to donate to campaigns. Yes, this is just the doozy. Isn't it so Kirsten gillibrand radical leftist from New York wants to give voters your money to donate back to her campaigns and others, and she calls them hysterically democracy die call them democracy now. Ladies and gentlemen. There's a couple of obvious basic flaws with this ridiculous plants just to be clear. She wants to give voters up to six hundred dollars for vouchers. Those vouchers you can then give to a candidate that they can then give to the candidate would can redeem for campaign fund. So from the NBC news piece every eligible voter could register for vouchers to donate up to one hundred dollars in a primary one hundred and a general either all at once or in ten dollar increments to one more candidates each participate. We get a participant would get a separate two hundred dollar pool for house Senate and presidential contest for a total maximum donation of six hundred dollars. Do those federal offices? Ladies and gentlemen. What's the problem with this plan, which is interesting, by the way, Joe because the Democrats will lobby ferociously against school vouchers, right? Three kids who could actually go to school and get an education, but their lobby for that can go back into their campaign coffers. Here's the problem. I mean, the problem is obvious wanted opens up all kinds of boxes about tax dollars. But Secondly, here's what I see happening candidates would start campaigning for vouchers and not votes. So think about this scenario. See you remember when you're a democrat. You never have to think about as Thomas will call like stage two questions they asked a simple questions like well. That'd be great. It would allow people to participate in democracy. Okay. And then what what's the stage to question saying you're in a race? Joe lives in Maryland. And there are a number of congressional seats in Maryland, which he's million with where the outcome of the racist. Predetermine? You have a guy say like Elisa? Comings? I'm not sure what congressional district. He's in in Maryland. I think it may be five. I'm not really sure but Elijah Cummings wins his race in Maryland for congress. He represents parts of Baltimore City. Typically, Joe by what like thirty and forty points, his sake. Big. This is pretty bad. Like, there's never a primary. I mean, even if it's twenty points never close Elijah Cummings is in office as long as he wants to stay there. Right. I don't mean to single him out. He even though we have disagreements on policy. I'm just trying to give an example. I'm kind of familiar with because I know Maryland politics haven't run there. Allies, your comings has no electoral worries at all. In other words show. He doesn't have to campaign for votes. He's got name ID. Nobody primaries him, and there's no serious Republican challengers going to be able to take them out because it's a democrat plus twenty district. Right. So let's say Elijah Cummings. Oh now knows that. He can get up words of say two hundred dollars per person for his house race for his campaign. Now, all of a sudden, you have a bunch of people only marginally interested in politics, but they're very interested in some business decisions in their community who keep in mind Cummings. Isn't violent isn't campaigning for votes. He's got he's gonna get a link to no matter what. Now, you have a group of these citizens that get together and say, hey, you know, we could use this little government handout over here. And by the way, if we get hundred or two hundred of us together, we could Marshall together thousands of dollars in campaign vouchers, and we could go into Elijah Cummings office and not not. Not tell them are votes are at stake. But our vouchers are at stake. Oh. Ladies and gentlemen, has anyone thought this through the potential for corruption? Here is geometric. This is a really stupid idea that only quasi-socialist would want to enact the system is bad. Now, granted this thing would be even worse scrapped this disaster stat. All right. All right. Let me go to quickly end of Medicare for us it great daily signal piece up about Medicare for all they had a hearing on the hill yesterday. I'd like you to read it just going to cover four takeaways. This is important daily single piece four takeaways from House Democrats Medicare for all hearing by Rachel del Cadec. I think I'm saying that right Metallica. I should know how to say that whereas it should be. So. Bongino dbongino. So I'm assuming it's get these. We say our jeez. Like, Jay's right? So they had this hearing and four points. They brought up about Medicare for all again. The theme here being what's happening in Venezuela. Can darn well happen here? When you power socialist who now want to take over campaign donations, they want to take over your healthcare system. So they had a couple of people up there yesterday up on the hill. And they brought up four points this Medicare for all hearing in this piece. The I was that one of the democrat groups that went up there to lobby for Medicare for all Joe said tragically, and I mean this. That the VA system is like the perfect model for this. Go check out veterans affairs. Veterans are getting great healthcare. Great healthcare up there parodying. The Alexandria case yo Cortez line about how great VA is conveniently leaving out. The fact that there was an enormous VA scandal under the Obama administration were veterans the best of us. People who sacrifice men and women their safety and security. Protect our freedom under our constitutional Republic their healthcare. They were being left on rationed waiting lists to die. The guy up there on the hill who was advocating for the VA system, and they might have missed that story. So that was the number one takeaway that the Democrats are tragically using the VA as a model of government efficiency knowing people have actually died waiting for healthcare on these lists number two. Another democrat group up there cited the efficiencies built in and a government system. Ladies and gentlemen. This is a joke. I have the bunk. This talking point a thousand points a thousand times over on this show. There are no cost and quality benefits or efficiency benefits for introducing third party payers. The government is a third party payer in traditional free market. There are two parties. There is a doctor and a patient the patient agrees on a price. They're willing to pay the doctor agrees on a price. They're willing to charge. The patient wants quality the doctor needs to provide quality to attract the patient. This is not hard. When a third party pays the government. The government pays the doctor. The doctor has no incentive to provide quality or to serve as many patients as he can where. Because the patients aren't paying right. The patient. Also has no incentive to seek out. The best price from the doctor not impugning doctors, by the way. It's just simple economics works anywhere in any field. Not healthcare only the patient doesn't care about the price. They're not paying they already paid through their tax dollars. They're going to try to get as many of those dollars back as they can runs drives up costs. So the second point Democrats brought up on the hill is utterly absurd. The third there was some Republican counterstrikes. The takeaway was there's going to be a massive doctor shortage approximately a shortage of one hundred twenty thousand doctors. Now, this will only be exacerbated as doctors find out that under Medicare for all they're all going to take a forty percent haircut on their salaries could luck retaining people. Then. Finally last takeaway in LA will run for the day. Rationing is inevitable. Ladies and gentlemen. There is no doubt that this is going to happen. Reasonable people understand. There are only two ways in the world. We know if you can find third way, let me know you won the Nobel prize for economics to allocate scarce resources a doctor's time medicine and hospital. Beds are scarce resources by nature. They are not unlimited. You can allocate them by rationing or you can allocate them by price. Anyone who tells you? There's a third way that in a government run third party system that doesn't use prices. It can't use prices as an effective measure because the government is paying the price mechanism is controlled by supply and demand. When the supply demand between the patient, and the doctor is interrupted by third party, the price mechanism doesn't work the patient doesn't care about the price. They're not paying and the doctor isn't care about the price because they know the patient is in pain. So if there are two ways prices in rationing, and the price mechanism fails. I was accidentally going to lower the wrong finger there. I'm not even kidding totally by the state weird on the video. Yeah. Good kansas. Right. If the price mechanism fails because you're introducing a third party the government to pay which disrupts the relationship what takes over rationing. Those are the only two ways you can ration or price. And when you introduce the government is a third party payer. You are introducing by default rationing, just be honest with people, but they won't because the Democrats love to lie. All right, folks. Thanks again for tuning and I really appreciate it. Please check out our YouTube channel check out yesterday show. We put a little clip from it on yesterday show. A little teaser clip. Paulo was nice enough to put in their YouTube dot com slash Bongino. And please subscribe to our show. Can I make this request extra strong today? Please please go to tunes other podcasts app. If you have an iphone you can go use I harder soundcloud, if you have an Android. Please subscribe to the show this subscriptions this week have been a little slow. I think it's because a lot of new shows are being introduced, but it's a subscriptions that move up the charts and help people find our show. We don't have a huge marketing budget here, we try to keep our costs low swing. Keep the show running please, go to itunes and subscribe. It's all free. Thanks a lot. I really appreciate it. I'll see you all tomorrow. Which some I'm sure some highlights from this bar hearing. You just heard the Dan Bongino show. You can also get Dan's podcast on itunes, soundcloud, and follow Dan on Twitter. Twenty four seven at dbongino.

Trump Muller Joe rob Muller Donald Trump Donald J Trump Bill bar president attorney Bob Muller America Venezuela congress Washington Post Trump United States prosecutor producer Dan Bongino flu
Muellerpalooza

The Daily Beans

38:42 min | 1 year ago

Muellerpalooza

"It's the holiday season and things are sucking. We're all pissed at each other but here comes my Christmas gift to you. The premiere of my I brand new. podcast starring me triumph. The insult comic dog. Yes it's going to be great. Think of it as Joe Rogan not done steroids. It's a live game show called. Let's make it. We're going to have great guests and also Anthony SCARAMUCCI. I'm partnering with my friend. Ended Star Burns audio and also team coco the people who brought you some not greatest shows ever cancelled by and best of all we are according to show live in Brooklyn Union temple so you can attend a taping and see for yourself. What podcast magazine cars? Another fucking doc in podcast. You'll hear brand new episodes in the New Year and can subscribe right now on Apple. PODCASTS spotify stitcher Google or whatever so that we can count your automatic downloads for weeks after you had quit listening. Enjoy uh-huh this since Hello and welcome to the daily beans for Monday. December Twenty Third Twenty nineteen I'm your host. AG and today. Hey we have our interviews from the Muller Palooza episode of Muller she wrote which originally aired on December thirtieth two thousand eighteen and includes appearances by. Greg Proops Mimi Rocca. Joyce Vance Seth Abramson Andrea Chalupa. Sarah Cancer Virginia Heffernan Renato Mariotti Scott to work in Elizabeth McLaughlin. Greg only are Dr Jack. Brian David Preece and Randall of honey. Badger don't give a shit fame Each guest will tell us what they think is most important to them. The story that they eighth thought had the most impact in twenty eighteen. So I hope you enjoy listening to this as much as I enjoyed making it all right guys and four The interview what what we did did this week was. We got all of our favorite Listeners past guests all together and we did this last minute. Everyone was so kind to do this. And we ask them what they thought thought the most consequential new story like like in our molar madness bracket or weirdest or funniest story is of twenty eighteen To See what they thought what and and here is a montage of all of their answers. So this is Joyce dance the most important development in the Mueller investigation in twenty the eighteen is something that's been hotly debated at my dinner table over the last few nights but where I come down I think is a is a slightly off center place from where most people are I think about molars central charge figuring out whether the trump campaign worked with Russians to get him elected. We don't know the answer that for sure. Muehler I think by now does and the answer to that question is the most important thing that happened in the Russia investigation this year. You know we don't know where molars going we don't know if he'll be indicting anyone else or not. But this idea that he has evidence that's not yet public that he's compiled so that he can reach these decisions. Is I think the most important thing that he's done this year and the most important thing for all all of us and it may even be some of those important pieces have leaked out into the public but we don't yet know their significant because we don't see the whole picture and then I think the final thing it's important say is the Bob Mueller is taken on this mythical significance for some folks in this country free but we have to remember that he's a prosecutor he's not a knight in shining armor. He will at the end of the day do prosecutor's job. His his goal is not naught cannot be to save all of us simply to fulfill his responsibilities as a prosecutor. So he'll use the he'll do it in a truthful way but he's he's shown us that we can have confidence in him and that is certainly is not a political operation or a witch hunt. This is a prosecutorial effort to to seek the truth and to hold accountable. Those who are responsible so I see that as the most important lesson that we've learned this year wrapped up with the most important work. That Moeller has done hi. This is Sarah Cancer on the CO host of the podcast gasoline nation And I think the most interesting trump Russia story of twenty eighteen eighteen is the reason expose and buzzfeed about the hijacking of the US Treasury by Russia As early as twenty fifteen i. I think it's appalling that this was in Stopped that it's only being reported now so kudos to buzzfeed finally breaking that story And the implications inside they are enormous. And I don't think that we've we've seen the scope of that play out yet. This is Seth Abramson on the author of proof of Collusion Ocean for me. The most important trump Russia event of twenty eighteen by far with no clear second place is a report that came out in the New York Times on May nineteenth twenty eighteen in which the New York Times reported that on August. Third Twenty Sixteen. There was a meeting that occurred. Did at trump tower and that meeting at trump tower is critically important now and it will be going forward to the trump Russia investigation. So let me give some context to that new doc times reporting a first of all. Let me say that. There's been no follow up on that reporting from the New York Times. But we do know that. Robert Mueller is looking into that meeting specifically The reason I think this meeting on August Third Twenty Sixteen at trump tower could turn out to be the single most important event in the entire trump Russia. Timeline not just in two thousand eighteen eighteen but of all the events that we have heard so far is because of three things first of all who was their second of all what was discussed at that meeting and third. The current right status of the meeting's participants with respect to the Muller investigation. So let me start first with who was at that trump tower meeting on August third twenty sixteen about ninety days before the two thousand sixteen election the first person who was there was donald trump junior and anytime donald trump junior who's not officially connected the campaign but obviously his father author was the Republican candidate. Twenty sixteen anytime. He's at a meeting. That's crucially important because it brings with it everything that that implies first of all did he tell his father about out the meeting on August. Third Two thousand sixteen before it happened. Deedee tell them about it immediately after it happened to Donald Trump senior offer any input into how Donald trump junior conducted himself at that meeting meeting or even because we know that Donald Trump senior sometimes quote unquote attended meetings in trump tower. Through one way speakerphone. Where people didn't know he was listening on meeting eating? There's even a possibility that the candidate himself was aware of what was happening at the meeting. While it was happening the second person was there. George Nader an emissary the Saudi Crown Prince who we know is NBC and also an emissary of the United Arab Emirates Emirati Crown Prince M B Z. That's how he's known Mohammed Bin Zayed. NBS is Mohammed bin. Salman Nater met with Jared Kushner. Michael Flynn's Steve. Bannon ended appears possible even Donald Trump on many the occasions after the election. But this is the first meeting we know of that took place prior to election day. That George Nader attended. It's important for people to understand that George Nader was the architect of what I call the red seat conspiracy that is a plot was hatched on a yacht in the Red Sea in November or December of two thousand fifteen into have three Middle East nation leaders. NBS NBC and the President of Egypt. I'll see partner with a US politician and it was decided on that yacht that the politicians donald trump to remake the Middle East dramatically geopolitically diplomatically militarily and in every possible since the third person who was at that meeting on August twenty sixteen was Eric. Prince trump was a shadow national. Excuse me Erik. Prince was a shadow national security adviser for Donald Trump during the campaign. He was involved in the hunt for Hillary's emails. He was involved in covert trump negotiations with Russia and also with Middle Eastern nations nuclear technology and the use of American mercenaries in place of a American military might in the Middle East in Syria and elsewhere. And then finally the last person person who they're Joel Zamel someone who we will be hearing a lot more about an Israeli businessman who previously was in Israel intelligence agent who at the time of that August in two thousand sixteen meeting was working with to trump connected Russian oligarchs rebollo who trump allegedly. We believe met with twice twice in the ten days before the two thousand sixteen election. And they're Pasca who is of course Paul manafort contact In terms of someone who is a Kremlin a agent and someone someone who manafort had previously worked with and briefly. Just say what was discussed there. What was discussed is the nature representing Saudi Arabia and the UAE and Zamel representing Israeli intelligence intelligence interests as well as the Kremlin offered collusive assistance to the trump family? And here's the key thing the New York Times reports that Donald trump junior said yes so put aside for a moment that June twenty sixteen meeting where the Russians offered collusive assistance allegedly the trump's in the person of Donald Trump junior and jared Kushner said no in this this case the New York Times said that Donald trump junior said yes and then finally. What's the current status of those meetings participants while Donald Trump junior has told friends that he expects to be indicted? We have reports from the New York Times in Washington. Posted Prince clearly lied to Congress during his testimony and therefore we might expect their prince will at some point be indicted and then most importantly George Nader is cooperating with Robert Muller so Robert Muller knows everything about the lead up to this meeting and what happened with George Nader and also Eric Prince afterwards for instance. It's one of the reasons we know. Our Prince lied to Congress about his January. Two thousand seventeen meeting in the Seychelles is because George Nader told Robert Mueller that he had set up that meeting so that prince could be trump's envoy to career Dmitri of of the Russian Foreign Investment Direct Fund and therefore we know that George Nader can implicate Erik Prince. So I think that the what I referred to as the grand bargain among a large number of nations to offer pre-election collusive assistance to the trump's essentially crystallized based on that date with all of the key parties except for Egypt's present in that room in trump tower on August twenty sixteen and. Wouldn't you know two weeks after that meeting George popadopoulos orchestrated meeting between Donald Trump. And the President of Egypt el-sisi and Michael. Flynn attended that meeting just as Michael. Flynn attended subsequent swint meetings with George Nader with NBC. With Eric. Prince with Steve Bannon with jared Kushner as they fleshed out this five-nation illegal goal collusive pre-election bargain to offer money and other forms of assistance to the trump campaign. This is David priests. I'm the Chief Operating Officer of the low-fare Institute known for the Law Fair blog author of how to get rid of the president histories guide to removing unpopular unable or unfit to chief it executives and Robert Muller's former daily intelligence briefer from when I was back at CI reflecting back on twenty eighteen. The most important moment related to muller that I can think of is the hacking Lincoln indictment in July of the twelve twelve brushes in part. Because of its specificity. All of us have been saying for a while but Muller does his homework that he crosses his t's dots his eyes. There wasn't going to be anything sloppy about it. And we had a preview of that in the February indictments of the IRA chill farm. But the July indictment was exquisite exquisite in terms of the specific emails street addresses and all of those involved in the targeting of the Clinton campaign. But the odd at this moment for me came not that far removed from that in time. The oddest moments twenty eighteen was what I call Muller Gate which was on July twenty seven seven when Bob Muller in junior were seen together at the same time report gate at Reagan National Airport in Washington. DC and and you would have thought for the next week that this was the second coming because everybody wanted to comment about. They were at the same. What could they have done? Did they notice just about anything to to do with. This was headline news. It even got Peter car the spokesman for the special counsel to actually comment publicly something. He was not want to do he. As I recall confirmed that Muller was in the photo and said that he was reading to board a flight. And there's more words than we'd got out of Peter car in many ways days so the obsession with Muller Gate in July is certainly odd. But it is a reflection of the fact that he has not been taking a public stance. And and that's bodes well for twenty nineteen. Hey this is Jack Brian I'm the CO writer director of the documentary active measures And I think that the biggest consequential story relating to trump and Russia this year has been Rick Gates flipping. It hasn't gotten a lot of attention recently and It feels like it's been overshadowed by other Things but gates is a character. Who is I think? Very much Part of the Russian operation with Manafort and kind of takes over for Manafort to some extent after manafort leaves on the transition and also nose sort of back story away with Manafort that The other people in this might not and so. I think that there is certainly chance that account and flipping could be the biggest steal Or siding. It's also possible that some foreign intelligence services helping out. We don't really have enough of that yet into the gates thing thing from my money is likely to be the story that Had the most effect in that it allows Muller to cross reference his his Interviews after that and Gates has information. Hi this is Greg only are the author of dirty rubles and introduction to trump Russia and for me the most consequential story for me Involving trump Russia was the murder of journalist. Jamal Kashogi I guess it wasn't consequential. It was more of a mind blow for me personally because what it what it brought home for me was how fast fast the scope of all of this really is Trump Russia. It turns out isn't really just about Russia. It doesn't confine itself to that boundary and those borders other countries involved. And it's not so much the murder of Kashogi as much as the connections that jared Kushner had with NBS the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Who We know pretty much was behind the assassination and trump in his bizarre our response to it just clinging desperately to any excuse could to to to to wish it away and hope that people didn't ask any more questions since he didn't want to blame? NBS I think it it sort of brought home for me. Just how corrupt these people are. How much people have on them? How much they owe other people for where they are and how willing they are to do? What what the people say in command them to to do so? I think one of the questions people constantly ask is what's taking so long. Hurry Up Muller wh why is it taking so along and I think it's taking so long because of the scope of this thing it's just it we know more than most people and what we know is is the tip of the iceberg comparison. I to what Muller knows and it's just so big that it just takes time. Hey this is ag. And you're listening to our Muller Palooza interview from December Thirtieth Twenty eighteen. I hope you're enjoying it here. On the daily beans will be right back with more in just a moment this portion of the daily beans brought to you by route insurance. I'm a good driver and I am a great driver. I do not get road rage mostly because I listened to classical music when I drive but I do flip the bird like on conducting a symphony. But what does get me mad actually as overpaying for Car Insurance and now I'm done with that because I have found the ideal inexpensive insurance company for me it's called route insurance instead of basing your car insurance rate on credit score age gender or Zip Code Route Insurance bases at primarily on how you drive by taking bad drivers out of the equation route saved. It's good drivers up to fifty two percent in two thousand nineteen and there's a reason why route has been featured in Forbes techcrunch wired the Washington Post and Fortune magazine in two thousand nineteen. It was the fastest growing direct insurance company in the United States and the world's first mobile first car insurance company. Their insurance card is available right from your phone and if you get into an accident you can file a claim directly in the APP. So easy car insurance made easy. Who'd have thunk with rates based on how you drive not who you are? I love it and all you have to do is download the root insurance APP dry normally for a few weeks during the root test drive life and see how much you can save. Don't wait and give it a try. Had to your APP store. Download the root insurance APP. Sign up in less than a minute to start your test drive today. That's route are ot again download the APP today or visit join route dot com to learn more and see how much you could save reserves the right to refuse a quote any individual premium rate for the insurance advertise here in savings based on national reviews reported by actual customers form one not available in all states. This product is not available in California. And now back to our or Muller Palooza interviews. I this is Scott and the CO founder of the Democratic Coalition and. I'm also the host of the workmen. Were cast I think I think the most important story twenty eighteen has to be Michael. Cohen's indictment and also partial flipping on trump it. Just this was Joe. Cataclysmic towards his administration. And it's been so a long ungoing and there's so many facets of you have not only only the payoff born stars that Bull F. E. C. violations felonies of directed by trump which also makes him inundate unindicted unindicted co-conspirator but also you have the parts of Russia in the other business deals that they've done one over the past fifteen years or so so there there's a lot to to dig in there on top of the fact that the coming guilty and he started cooperating at least a little bit with prosecutors. So I think that this is something that will end up being you you the worst or Detroit because he was the wing man. Hey it's Elizabeth Cronies mcglaughlin from resistance. Lives so my choice. Glorious for the most significant event of the year with regard to trump Russia is actually somewhat unconventional. I think and it is the Flynn sentencing memorandum random. That was filed by Robert Mueller. The reason why I think it's so significant is that Flynn had his hands in so much dirty. Ugly Stauce dos. The attempt to kidnap a Turkish citizen and return him to earn on the negotiations that we know of right now with the Russian John. Bassett are the ongoing attempts to get nuclear power into Saudi Arabia and Egypt from the Russians and the Chinese and he was engaged in all of this during the transition and the time that he was a national security adviser loan behold we get to December of this year and Robert Muller Files Sentencing memorandum. I'm that recommends that Flynn doesn't do any jail time and for me coming out of a white collar legal background someone who's WHO's been engaged in litigation that has had really massive criminal components. Attach sweat the idea that someone who had engaged in as much significant. It's dangerous criminal conduct. Mike Flynn would get a recommendation of no jail. Time from Robert Muller I think tells us an awful awful lot about what Flynn has given up in the context of information with regard to trump. I find it very hard to believe personally that he could would've gotten a sentencing recommendation of no jail time if he had not slipped at bare minimum on the vice president if not the president himself and so to me the reason why this is the most significant event with regard to trump Russia and trump muller in two thousand. Eighteen is because of what it tells us about. What's likely coming down the pike for next year? My Name Mr enough to Maryadi. I'm a former federal prosecutor and the host of the on topic podcast to me. The most consequential thing that happened and this year was Michael Colin going in open court and saying under oath that Donald Trump directed him to commit a crime. It was unexpected and and I think it was extremely important because for the first time you had the president of the United States directly implicated in a crime that was charged and ultimately resulted in a conviction in federal court. It was later Confirmed by federal prosecutors accepted as a finding not not only by the Probation Department but ultimately adopted by the federal judge in that case. And I believe that we're so focused times on what's happening on the Russia side of things that we we failed to realize that in many ways That is in my mind. The most challenging and important legal problem problem that is facing the trump administration. It's an investigation. That is difficult for trump to stop. it it does not have anything to do with. His is typical rhetoric attacking the Muller investigation about angry Democrats or no collusion. It is just a straight up Crime that Is is that has fairly strong evidence. It's it's already resulted in a conviction and there's very good reason to believe That trump may also be guilty of the same crime but I think the untold story of this year is what I'll call CR- obstruction fatigue. We've gotten to the point where Donald all trump will say things that are openly corrupt. And we don't even bat an eye I remember one point this year. Donald trump trump tweeted out criticizing his attorney general jeff sessions for failing to quash the investigations and indictments of two Republican looking congressman who have been indicted and are accused of committing very serious crimes. He said that you know alternately. He thought it would result in the loss of those seats. And Essentially Ashley what he was saying is that the Attorney General of the United States should stop prosecutions of people if it benefits their party. Politically it is just straight up corrupt craft. There's no way to defend that statement and yet after a day or so. It was out of the news more. Recently he was directing Matthew Whitaker allegedly sadly but as reported by CNN To control the prosecutors in Manhattan and the Southern District of New York once again it was a one day story that that to me is very troubling and it says something about our democracy and I I think when this is all said and done a Robert Mueller's GonNa have a lot to say about obstruction auction of justice and if it is not taken seriously on a bipartisan basis. Impart that will be to our to do our own. failure to You maintain the outrage that we should have a president who is openly corrupt and trying to undermine the rule of law. Hello this is Greg proops troops on the host of the man in the world. podcast that my wife Jennifer. I put together every week and take around the world where we discuss politics and history music the drugs and the like I think the most consequential A happenstance in the Mueller investigation. In the last year is of course all of the the indictments and convictions We're talking dozens now including Russian nationals and I think in the last few weeks. Awesome having Michael Flynn Spilled the beans as it were to special investigators and then Plead that he didn't know How that worked? And how the judge in Washington actually become furious with mccollum traitor and then have to re step on that and retract attract on that I think says quite a lot about the character of all the people involved in this giant criminal operation. I also feel like a finally. The public is getting thank hip to the fact that there's no such thing as collusion and meddling collusion meddling or made up terms that the White House uses to obfuscate the fact that we're talking about his collaboration and treason and an abrogation of about a million election laws. And and the like so I think that's what's Jennifer now we're discussing before I got on this show The absolute secrecy and Complete compact non leakage of the Miller team has been wildly impressive and the fact that they've been able to fund their entire investigation Gatien by forfeiture of assets. MANAFORT and all the villains involved in this and I feel like that's the most important thing that's happened so far and as a side note I would say that this the really truly the year of the woman with women taking over twenty five percent of the Congress for the first time. Nancy Pelosi or Mrs Pelosi. She's now into the White House Putting the fear of absolute goddess into all of the misogynous predators that run the show and that s something Miller she wrote which is A podcast run by three women that came hurtling out of obscurity would run into such acclaim and success in finding this is knee Roca. I am a former FBI via my prosecutor and now MSNBC legal analyst and he's university school walls and be most consequential and important I think moment in Twenty eighteen in the whole Russia investigation. We've witnessed special counsel office. Released two indictments one after the other Against the Russians for actually committing crimes in the United States by trying to been fear attacks our elections and I think it was the most important part so far because it actually put into facts and evidence things that we sort of knew that now really could know for sure because we knew that muller felt he could prove these things in court so that to me was the most important part so far be mostly hiree one. Happy New Year it Andrea Chiluba from Catholic nation nation. And I'm thrilled to join muller she wrote in this Fantastic lineup of wonderful guests. And so I think one of the key stories of twenty eighteen year of so much confirmation so much that we knew that was finally confirmed brought out in the open. We knew that they needed conduit on the ground pollinating their coalition of corruption. And of course we got that confirmation with the arrest and of Maria Tino a a Russian spy and So that was exciting. We knew that. The trump inauguration was one big Russian money laundering prom. I'm night which Maria Cina attended of course with her so-called Lover Ericsson So yeah so and now. That's being investigated investigated. And so that's wonderful. So we'll we'll probably hear more about the big inauguration they all the crimes that likely were happening out in the open during during that night with a record number of influential Russian. Russian oligarchs attending the inauguration There's ECORSE accusations of A you've spent funds and whether favors are being traded whether foreign policy American policy with being sold off essentially at that inauguration. So there's a lot of Going to be a lot of interesting development there to watch which I'm thrilled about because I was a terrifying night. Just give in the guest list alone alone and just the massive amount of money being spent and just a little to show for it that night So but I think the number one story to watch in twenty twenty eighteen where we had a frightening development is of course Ukraine. So what happened at the end of November Russia openly attacked Ukraine international waters watered. That's a big shift because normally Russia tries to hide it they had you know the so-called little green men showing up and annexing Crimea. They had so called Russian. Rebels rebels invading east Ukraine. Of course the Russian military in dating Ukraine and right now you have a big Russian military buildup inside creamy me a On the edge of east Ukraine so and and the rhetoric is it getting increasingly hostile and propaganda towards Ukraine. It's a lot of And it's all the signs are pointing to a very serious escalation in Ukraine and in two thousand nineteen So what's really significant about that. In in connection to trump Russia even say that the more investigation is this. You know we know that. Who didn't trump? We had a confirmed that but that Helsinki summit where trump came out like a chain dancing. Russian bear very submissive towards Putin and In in the Helsinki press conference. That was terrifying. There's even report that terrified that shocked people CIA And they're experts of course our ahead of all of us but it's still so stunning to see the so called leader of the free world being submissive almost like I I'd Meiring. This Mathurin dictator Putin and And during that press conference You had the leading up to it. You had the twelve Russians indicted You Got Maria Patina shortly thereafter arrested. So you really saw this. Check the balances by the more investigation. with Rosenstein coming out and saying we've got these Russians by my name here. They are to try to put a damper on Putin coming out party with trump But of course there's only so much that our checks and balances in the. US can do right now with this. Russian mafia acid in the White House. And I think there's no clear signals about the fact that the US has not think shinned Russia for openly talking Ukraine us has not led with the EU normally would have done under Obama in an and convincing the EU to pass further sanctions against Russia for openly attacking Ukraine. And I think that is the scariest thing yet but I don't WanNa say that Putin maybe winning but that is that is really where we need to to watch to see how this new world order could potentially shifting which such a power vacuum in the White House and Putin increasingly becoming more impure with imperialistic more aggressive He somehow was able able to convince trump together. Syria Syria's now fully owned by Russia Huge geopolitical wind for Putin the big base for them right there in the Mediterranean and so is Ukraine next and a lot of signs are pointing to a big escalation there. And and and and that's GonNa be dangerous because it's going to further to stabilize the U You'RE GONNA have. It's GonNa worse than the refugee crisis. In Ukraine millions have been displaced by the war in Ukraine on that in a worst refugee crisis of course would further flood the AP you with refugees and that could lead to a rise in the far right rhetoric. you you had the NATO commander of course in two thousand sixteen telling telling the Senate that Russia was deliberately bombing civilians inside Syria to create more refugees to flood in Europe while we do that because the far right parties that Putin can support supports. They like to use anti-refugee rhetoric. And and that's how they try to create hysteria and further. Push their nationalist agenda so I just think if Putin is going to go deeper inside Ukraine in create far more casualties and and who knows maybe take over the country that is going to really create more. Chaos and disables Asian the fact that we don't have a strong lighthouse standing up against that standing to protect against a worsening human rights crisis. That's really going to have a very bad ripple effect in Geopolitics so many years to come. And so that's why I think everyone should look out for is Ukraine and twenty nineteen and the lack thereof of sanctions by the US and the EU due to you know leaders right now You even had so. I think I'm GonNa keep going because I really want to press this point home. You had four days after that attack in international waters if you had a an adviser to Frederica Marini who oversees foreign affairs for the EU you had one of her advisers writing in in politico four days. After Russia openly taxi crane this adviser right politico Europe sanctions against Russia are not working so all of this points is to yes. Moore's investigation can come out with whatever it wants but it's still and shifting world order toward tunes world now and all that's GonNa come down to whether the US you will be. United in in things shinning Russia because things can do work or else Putin would not have gone to all this trouble to elect one of his assets of the United States. And that's my point between eighteen has though this is Virginia Heffernan. I am co-host of slates. TRUMP CAST An opinion writer for the L. A. Times and I also write a column for wired to me the most consequential part of the investigation. This past year was does the conviction arrest and imprisonment of Paul Manafort Manafort embodies the caricature of the corruption of the Republican Party. which for decades has been sending people abroad sending posing people as lobbyists posing people as PR people to clean up the reputations of murderous dictators including Yana Kovic and Oleg Derek Pasta the olive dark who was a client plant of Manafort's who's also had has his hand and many many bloody human rights abuses manafort together with Roger Stone defined into these kinds of acts for Republicans seemingly been put out to pasture and set up a network of United States politics laundering the reputations -tations of dictators abroad and to me he stands for the corruption of the GOP and his imprisonment stands hopefully for the redemption and reform of our political parties. Hey Hey hey this is randall of Randall's animals and I think I think the biggest trump Russia story of two thousand eighteen was all about that crazy ass. Honey Badger Judge Alice in his rulings. Then the men for trial he st Paul Manafort. Don't Care Paul Manafort. Don't give a shit but you know why because he's stupid. See Honey Badger. Don't care because it has to in order to live and survive in the wild but Paul Manafort don't care because he's just so stupid if you asked me judge. Alice went so hard on him him. Not because of all the counts of conspiracy or the five county tax fraud bank fraud. It was because he walked around an ostrich ostrich clothing. Hello I mean how can one not expect to face the heat when they walk around like that and ostrich close now. Here's some quick little F. F. Y.. Is About Paulie Manafort. He was born on April Fools Day. How funny is that in Connecticut? He's sixty nine years. Old and in his pop was indicted. Corruption Scandal in Nineteen eighty-one wasn't convicted. But he was indicted okay. It's something tells me me that Paul Manafort's Grandpa who immigrated from Italy. Eighteen hundred states in the early twentieth century would have no idea that his grandson would grow up up to walk around and ostrich close. Am I right. I mean. Could you imagine little ways anyways if you ask. It's me. Judge L. S. and Paul Manafort are the new Felix Unger and Oscar Madison sending big love and hugs to all you listeners out there and in wish you have the most fantastic new year. The daily beans is executive produced and directed by AG Jordan Coburn and engineered edited by Mackenzie Ms Ellis Turbines. Industries Are Marketing Manager Executive Assistant Production and Social Media Direction. Amanda Reader Fact Checking Research by AG Jordan Coburn and Amanda Reader Our music because written and performed by they might be giants or web design and branding or by Joel reader with moxy design studios and our website is daily beans pod dot com.

Donald Trump trump Robert Muller Russia Russia trump tower United States Michael Flynn Bob Mueller east Ukraine Manafort trump tower prosecutor Muller Prince trump President George Nader Greg Proops trump muller Jared Kushner
2139 - Robert Mueller House Judiciary Roundup w/ MR Crew

The Majority Report with Sam Seder

35:40 min | 1 year ago

2139 - Robert Mueller House Judiciary Roundup w/ MR Crew

"Jollity it is Wednesday July twenty four th two thousand Nineteen Music Isaac idea like this is a <hes> Special Report Ladies and Gentlemen Special version of the majority report <hes> wherein we just watched the three hour testimony of Robert Muller to the Judiciary Committee the Intelligence Committee hearing is happening in about half an hour what we're going to do now is in about <hes> twenty twenty five minutes more or less. Maybe a little less basically go over. The highlights of the hearing muller was even more reticent to say anything than we thought the last clip that we will plays I think one of the most clear of this and <hes> he seemed tired during it frankly and I don't even know if we have any highlights. We have one highlight from a Republican where he asked question. He didn't know an answer to and did not get the response he wanted. The rest of the Republicans Republicans basically spoke about how <hes> there were people in the D._O._J.. who were <hes> you know having an affair and <hes> and <hes> May questioning <hes> Muller's <hes> impartiality and whatnot so not terribly really relevant in that regard and really this is what this <hes> hearing is going to end up doing it's either going to do one of two things is GonNa take the air out of the <hes> the <hes> the the air out of the sales of impeachment or war? It's going to be a couple of clips that will be played over and over again. One of them will be one of the ones that we we present to you now. Let's just get right into this Robert Muller. Here's a short clip of his testimony his opening statement statement on his testimony. Here's our investigation found that the Russian government interfered in our election in sweeping and systematic fashion second investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired with the Russian government in its election interference activities. We did not address collusion which is not a legal term rather we focused on whether the evidence evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy and it was not third our investigation of efforts to obstruct the investigation and lied to investigators tres was of critical importance obstruction of justice strikes at the core of the government's effort to find the truth and to hold wrongdoers accountable finally as described in volume two of of our report we investigated a series of actions by the president towards the investigation based on Justice Department policy and principles of fairness. We decided we would not make a determination as to whether the the President committed a crime that was our decision then and remains our decision today okay now. There's two things there that he said at the end that are going to be relevant the I did knock get enough attention. It is based upon the O. L. C. Opinion about whether a sitting president can be charged with a crime that was one of the reasons is why we did not make a determination as to whether he committed a crime the second one was fairness. You have to ask yourself. Would it be unfair to say that someone did not commit a crime nine to that person. No it would not would it be unfair to say that they did commit a crime if there was no legal proceeding in which they could defend themselves yes it would so he's basically said there in his opening statement. Although you have to Parse it we would have charged him with a crime if he was not the president of the United States and there was an opportunity for him to defend himself and there was no oh l._l._C. ruling as to whether he should be charged here is Jerry Nadler who was the <hes> who provided the opening questions for Muller and this was one of the cast exchanges I think in terms of just being simple and straightforward got a number of challenges to our democracy <laughter> among the most serious completely claimed your report found there was no obstruction and that it completely and totally exonerated him but that is not what you report said. Is it correct that is not what the report said and reading from Page two volume two of your report. That's on the screen you wrote quote if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice we would so state based on the facts and the applicable the legal standards however we are unable to reach that judgment close quote now. Does that say there was no obstruction no in fact you were actually unable to conclude the president did not commit obstruction of justice is that. curric- well we at the outset determined we came to the the president's culpability we needed to. We needed to go forward only after taking account the oil C- opinion that indicated that a president sitting president cannot be indicted so the report did not conclude that he did not commit obstruction of justice. Is that correct that is correct and what about total exoneration. Did you actually totally exonerate the president well now in fact your reports expressly states that it does not exonerate the president does and your investigation actually found quote multiple acts by the president they were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations including the Russian interference and obstruction investigations. Is that correct correct now director Muller. Can you explain in plain terms what that finding means so the American people can understand it well. The finding indicates that the president was not <hes> the president was not. I'm scoping exculpated for the AXA. He allegedly committed in fact you were talking about incidents quote D- in which the president sought to use official power outside of usual channels unquote to exert undue influence over your investigations is that right that's correct now. Am I correct on page seven volume two of your report you wrote quote the the president became aware that his own conduct was being investigated in an obstruction of justice inquiry at that point the president engage in a second phase of conduct involving public attacks on the investigation non-public efforts is to control it and efforts both public and private to encourage witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation those quote so president trump's efforts to exert undue influence over your investigation intensified after the president became the way that he personally was being investigated. I stick with the language that you have in front of you which which from page seven volume to now is it correct that if you concluded that the President committed the crime construction you could not publicly state that in your report or here today and you repeat the question Sir. Is it correct that if you had concluded that the President committed the crime of obstruction you could not publicly state that in your report or here today today I would say you could statement would be that you would not indict and you would not indict because on oil see opinion sitting president excuse me cannot not be indicted be unconstitutional so you could not state that because of the opinion if that would have been your opinion some guide yes but under D._O._J.. You have this policy. The president could be prosecuted for obstruction of justice his crimes after he leaves office correct crew. Thank you did any senior White House. Official refused requests to be interviewed by you and your team. I don't believe so I take a let me take that back. You're not certain at that was the case. The president refused requests to be interviewed by you and your team Yes yes and is it true that you tried for more than a year to secure an interview with the president and is it true. Do you and your team advised the presence lawyer that quote an interview with the President is vital to our investigation. Yes and is it true that you also stink quote stated that it is in the interest of the presidency and the public for an interview to take place yes but the president still refused to sit for an interview by your your team true true and did you also ask him to provide written answers to questions on the ten possible episodes of obstruction of justice crimes involving him. Did he provide any answers to a single question about whether he engaged in obstruction of justice crimes. I would have to check on that. I'm not certain at the moment we are grateful that you were here to explain your investigation and findings having reviewed your work. I believe anyone else would engage okay and so there you have it <hes> some key things that Nadler brought out that Muller if Muller believed that obstruction had occurred he would not say it in the report or in this hearing because of the O. L. C. Because of the say Oh see holding and the subsequent implications it would be for fairness after that but he did say and we're going to hear this a couple of times that he can be charged. The president can be charged with obstruction of justice after he's no longer the president here here is a Zoe lofgren asking muller. She's a Democrat from California about Paul Manafort and the polling information that Paul Manafort handed onto <hes> one of his clients. I guess Sir Former clients here this election particularly when it came to computer crimes in the like the government was implicated so you wrote on in volume one that the Russian government interfered in the two thousand sixteen presidential election and sweeping and systematic fashion. You also describe in your report that then from campaign chairman Paul Manafort shared what they Russian operative. Creative Column Nick The campaign strategy for winning Democratic votes in mid Western states in internal polling data of the campaign isn't that correct greg they they also discussed the status of the trump campaign and manafort strategy for winning Democratic Votes Midwestern states months before that meeting Manafort had caused internal data to be shared with clinic and the sharing continued for some period of time after their August meeting isn't that correct inherit in fact your investigation found that manafort brief Kalinic on the state of the trump campaign and Manafort's plan to win the election and that breathing encompassed the campaigns messaging its internal polling data it also discussion fashioned of battleground states which manafort identified as Michigan Wisconsin Pennsylvania and Minnesota is that correct did your investigation determine who requested the polling data to be shared with Kalinic would <hes> directly to the report and what we have in the report with regard to that particular we can. We don't have the redacted version. This may be another reason why we should get that for volume one based on your investigation. How could the Russian in government have used his campaign positive one second? We don't know who directed metaphor to do that. It's weird that it would be redacted wouldn't it that's weird but bill bars not here and so we can't ask ask him why he redacted that. Go ahead reason why we should get that for volume one based on your investigation. How could the Russian government have used this campaign polling data to further? It's sweeping in systematic interference in the twenty sixteen out of our path fair enough. Did your investigation find that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from one of the candidates winning yes and which candidate would that be well. It would be a trump wrecked train for now. The trump campaign wasn't exactly looked into take Russian help you wrote it expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts. Isn't that correct correct now the investigations determination what was the the investigation is determination regarding the frequency with which the trump campaign made contact with the Russian government. I would have to refer you to report on that. Well we went through and we counted one hundred twenty six contacts between Russians or their agents and trump campaign officials or their associate so would that sound about right. I can't say I I understand this statistic and I believe it. I understand that statistic Mr Miller I appreciate your being here and so they're <hes> this question as to why why manafort share that information. Maybe it was just a clinic was just curious like how does has a campaign work. What do you guys do? I love data. I mean it's that's not that's not impossible to imagine eh. It's weird that you would redact the person who told Manafort to do it. That's strange particularly when it totally exonerates me yeah. It's weird thing weird thing but we don't know all right and here is a Republican Republican who is going to hopefully ask a question that he apparently does not know the answer to even though Muller had said it in his questioning with Nadler and his opening statement but let's put a a fine point on this the Ken Buck here we go charge of conspiracy with Russian interference in the two thousand sixteen election. Is that fair fair there. was there sufficient evidence to convict president trump or anyone else with obstruction of justice. We did not make that calculation. How could you not meet the calculation with regular L. C. Opinion The O. L. C. Opinion Office Louisville Council indicates that we cannot indict sitting president so one of the tools that are prosecutor would use is not there okay? Let me just stop you made the decision on the Russian interference. You couldn't have died the president on that and you made the decision on that but when it came to obstruction you through a bunch of stuff up against the wall to see what would stick and that is I would not. I would not agree to that <hes> characterization at all. What we did is provide the attorney the general in the form of a confidential memorandum our understanding of the case those cases that were brought those cases order declined and the that one case where the president cannot be charged with a crime okay but the could you charge the president with a Trimbe after he left office? Yes you believe that he committed you could charge the president United States with obstruction of justice after he left office yes okay. Now now look. I'm convinced that what Muller was saying hypothetically. You could however what buck does realize he's saying he's like you told us where in the first instance that there was not sufficient evidence that you found to charge the president with conspiracy. Why didn't you say that in the second instance well because the also says he can't be charged with a crime in other words we found sufficient evidence to charge him with a crime but it is impossible to charge him with the crime so we just let it hang there and he I wonder if he's GonNa come back and say I was not saying that you you that you could charge the president with a crime after he gets out of office if he was saying this President President or just in general maybe he meant to do that is like sort of will? It'll be interesting to see if that's correct but either way. I think it's also it's yes you could I think it has I think think you can see charge this president with the crime of obstruction after he gets out of office and one could generally charge a president with a crime once he gets out of office or she gets out of office. Here is Democratic Congressman David CIPOLLINI CECIL leany Cellini over here from Rhode Island making a point again that refutes those those who said you can't charge a crime of obstruction. If it is not successful here we go to Ms Lewinsky for general sessions and asked him to write it down. Is that correct crew and did you and your team see this handwritten message. I'M NOT GONNA get into what we may or may not have included in our investigate. The message directed sessions to give an and I'm quoting report to give a public speech saying that he he planned to meet with the special prosecutor to explain this very unfair and let the special prosecutor move forward with investigating election meddling for future elections. That's a page ninety one. Is that correct. Yes I see that thank you is in other words. Mr Lewandowski a private private citizen was instructed by the President of the United States to deliver a message from the president to the Attorney General that directed him to limit your investigation correct correct and at this time is two sessions was still recused from oversight of your investigation correct. I'm sorry could you general recused from the Attorney General would have had to vitaly his own departments rules in order to comply with the president's order correct get into the subsidiary details. I just refer you again unto Patriae Ninety one ninety two the report. If the attorney general had followed through with the presence crest Mister Molay it would have effectively ended your investigation into the president and his campaign as you note on page ninety seven correct could you aw you write quote taken together. The president's directors indicate that sessions was being instructed to tell the special counsel to end the existing investigation into the president and his campaign with a special counsel being permitted to move forward with investigating election meddling for future actions that correct generally true yes sir and it's an unsuccessful attempt to obstruct justice is still a crime is that correct that is correct and Mr Lewandowski tried to me with the Jerry Jones that right that's all you need to know that is one of the building blocks of those people who deny that there was a crime committed so let's just knock down some of these things that we've heard in the two weeks not just from trump but <hes> in the two weeks after the report it was issued that it totally exonerated. Donald Trump Muller says now that you cannot be charged with obstruction if unsuccessful muller says that's not correct he also so has as far as I can tell explicitly said the reason why we did not charge him with obstruction was because the all see tells us that we cannot the office of Legal Council and the Department of Justice so we did everything we could up to that line now. Let's go to Ted lieu who will reaffirm that in a very very explicit exchange here. This is a Democrat from California on that very topic of the statement. The whole indict Donald Trump is because of oil see opinion stating that you cannot die sitting president correct that is correct the fact that their borders by the present were not carried out that is not a sense to go back to the beginning of that I want I want to be very clear what Muller said here now maybe again he misspoke and did not mean to say that the own the that but that's basically what he's saying in about four different ways could conclude that all three elements of the crime of obstruction justice have met and I like to ask you the reason again that you did not indict. Donald trump is because of oil see opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president correct that is correct the the fact that their order is by the president would not carried out that is not a defense to associate justice because the statute itself was quite broad it says that as endeavor or attempt to obstruct justice that would also. So constituted a crime I get into that juncture posit earlier. He did say interesting. There was some instances where he would say it. I'm not sure what made it the the that specific thing that is something he wouldn't respond to but there you have it here is Cedric Richmond Democrat from Louisiana <hes> another mechanism in which Donald Trump obstructed justice as they go through and largely what happened been dafter Lou in throughout where the Democrats were just going through the different counts of obstruction of justice that took place and it got very mired and none of it is relevant insofar as this is a political political. This is all about politics and it that stuff may make it into an impeachment report but not if there is not an impeachment inquiry so but this stick lookout in terms of <hes> of why one might begin impeachment inquiry Cedric Richmond Democrat from Louisiana so it's fair to say the president tried to protect himself by asking staff to falsify ossified records relevant to an ongoing investigation I would say that's a summary. Would you say that that action. The president tried to hamper the investigation by asking staff to falsify records relevant to your investments referring to the report if I could for the so he doesn't want to go that far in saying that accept because it's in the report here is Congresswoman Val demings Florida again making the point of why obstruction is a crime and why again multiple counts of obstruction and how it implicates the investigation of the so-called old underlying crime according to your report page nine volume one witnesses lied to your office and to Congress those laws materially impaired the investigation of Russia interference according into your report other than the individuals who plead guilty to crimes based on their line to you and your team did other witnesses live you can probably expect our witnesses. I'm sorry about that. It's hanging there guy bear with US folks little technical issue. He's saying there is a <music> spectrum of pled guilty to crimes based on their line to you and your team did other witnesses light. You can probably expect witnesses in terms terms of those who are not telling the truth and those are out liars. Thank you very much outright liars. It is fair to say then that there were limits on what evidence was available to your investigation of both Russia election election interference and obstruction of justice true and usually the case and that laws by trump campaign officials and administration officials impeded your investigation would generally agree with that. Thank you so much director Mueller or for me. She's going to be back in the Intel Committee but there you go. I mean he could not do the investigation. He could not find the evidence he specifically said because of the lies all right lastly. This is our our last one right. This is Veronica. Escobar is right and this is super important because I would have spent more time on this frankly. I don't know how much they coordinated. It seems like they coordinated but this goes to the question of of impeachment and if Muller in his report by noting that there are constitutional <hes> procedures to deal with this to deal with this this is sort of a question mark right but he is said in the report and in this hearing the reason why they did not indict trump on obstruction is because of the O. L. C. ruling and he further said in the report and there are constitutional procedures in which to deal with this and here is that point being brought out in the hearing frankly it should have been brought out they all went through the obstruction charges and instead of doing that. Each one of them should have had this line of questioning. It seems to me Tsk Director Muller. You wrote in your report that you quote determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgement and quote was that in part because of an opinion by the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel. All that he's sitting president can't be charged with a crime director Muller at your May Twenty Nine Twenty nine thousand nine press conference. You explained that quote the opinion says that the constitution requires there's a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse the sitting president of wrongdoing and quote that process other than the criminal justice system for choosing a president of wrongdoing is that impeachment and in your report you also wrote that you did not want to quote potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct and quote quote for the non lawyers in the room. What did you mean by quote? Potentially Preempt Constitutional Processes Prado explain that that actually is coming from page. One of volume two in in the footnote is the reference to this. What are those constitutional processes? I think I heard you mention of each one impeachment correct okay comment all right positive okay so here's the bottomline all right. Here's the bottom line. This is Robert Muller trying to protect himself from being on television with the word impeachment coming out of his mouth. That's it bottom line. He he said before he came to testify told the committee he will not read from the report he was asked to on multiple occasions he had already said I will not do that and he did not want the word impeachment to come out of his mouth just as a principal as directive to himself but he did say like Oh. If you put it up on the wall the word I will point to it as long as we can't see. There's no camera camera shot at me pointing to that word you just mentioned it. I mean it's it's childish and to a certain extent this is this is his posture throughout the whole thing and frankly this is cowardly. It's cowardice yeah like why is he doing this. Is that he because he he wanted to protect himself. Throughout this thing he didn't want to walk away from the job and he wanted to protect himself and that's it and he's able to do it because the Democrats are very differential exactly well what my imagine in the long term. It'll be protecting himself more more if he does it look like he sat on his hands in the face of a rising authoritarian threat. I mean I think largely people will forget his name down the road and that's what he wants but that's it. That's the judiciary <hes> monarch notes cliff nokes. Whatever you WANNA say to it and we should drop this up in the front part of the Audio we can well folks as you notice? I'm shaving today. A lot of guys buy disposable razors when they travel this summer. You don't have to sacrifice quality for price. You can join the ten million people who have tried Harry's claim your special offer by going to Harrys dot com slash majority report Harry's delivers high quality travel friendly shave supplies at a great low price. Just two bucks plate keep prices low they cut out the middleman by purchasing a world-class Blade factory in Germany and now they provide great quality at factory direct. Prices Harry's has been one of our longest term supporters advertisers on this show. I cannot tell you how many times people say to me you clean up nice after I have <hes> shaven and then often I did it today with anticipation that maybe I will go on television. I generally don't like to shave that much. Harry's Harry's is made it a much more pleasant experience for me. Ladies and gentlemen the summit refresh your wallet and your face with Harry's trial set it comes with weighted Ergonomic handle for an easy grip the five blade razor with a lubricating strip and the Sam Sam Cedar Favourite Trimmer Blade for close shave and also works <hes> around my <hes> asymmetrical <hes> nostrils rich lathering Shave Gel that will leave you smelling great and a travel blade cover to keep your razor dry and easy on the go listeners on my show. Oh can redeem their trial set at Harrys dot com slash majority report. Make sure you go to Harrys DOT COM slash majority report to redeem your offer. Let them know I sent you to support the show all right folks. We're going to be back in moments to cover the Intel hearing with Robert Muller. We will be doing that live. Thank you for watching this. We'll be back in about five or ten minutes once we inject some some food into us and thank you for joining us and and by in that girl street gets you. I just got the truth Ah.

president Robert Muller Donald Trump Muller President President United States Russian government Paul Manafort Donald Trump Jerry Nadler Justice Department director Ken Buck California prosecutor official Department of Justice Office o AXA attorney Germany
Mueller breaks his silence to say only Congress can accuse POTUS of wrongdoing

The Beat with Ari Melber

49:03 min | 2 years ago

Mueller breaks his silence to say only Congress can accuse POTUS of wrongdoing

"The. May twenty nine twenty nineteen. This is the day that, Bob Muller broke his silence and resigned, his office as the most consequential special counsel in a generation, Melissa, speaking publicly for the first time today in more than two years after thirty seven indictments guilty, pleas from five Trump aids a four hundred forty eight page report, all against the backdrop of intense, obstruction of his probe and wider attacks on the Justice department, some of that obstruction was charged by Muller himself, some was referred out to other prosecutors in cases that we know are still open and tonight, I can tell you some of the potential obstruction was not charged at all because as Bob Muller, underscored in breaking his silence. Today, the Justice department rules prevented him from ever indicting a sitting president Millard delivering that pivotal point that the legal wall barricading Muller from ever doing anything with his evidence on President Trump other than writing down for congress. He delivered that today in his signature. Understated manner noted in his first remarks to the country here that he would basically not be able to give Donald Trump, the good news that there was no crime. In fact, that if he wanted to he would have given that good news if the evidence supported it, but, and this is important and some of this may get lost we're going to break it down for you right now. Bob Muller and his first ever remarks a special counsel. Made it clear the evidence he gathered in that exhaustive. Probe did not provide the confidence that President Trump clearly did not, quote commit a crime. As forth in the report after that investigation if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime. We would have said. So if you remember nothing else from this historic day, it is historic data American history. No matter what else happens. Remember this Bob Mueller breaks his silence today and uses this singular appearance facing the country as the saying may go to stay the Muller, probes, lack of an indictment of President Trump is not a finding about Donald Trump's guilt or innocence. He is trusting you trust in the American public to actually slow down and thinking here this out because it's not altogether. Obvious Muller is explaining in these I ever remarks that no evidence would ever have allowed the DOJ not Muller not bar no-one at DOJ to indicted sitting president, that's obviously rebuttal the team Trump and to the impression left by attorney general bar. Muller didn't present this to be clear fair, as any kind of disagreement in public with bar today Muller was careful and he was courteous throughout. But we can also state the fact that the Muller report, which urges everyone to read today, it does disagree with bars famous depiction in fundamental ways. It notes that neither Muller nor bar could ever charge, the president wall. He is in office. We did not, however make determination as to whether the president did commit a crime, the introduction to the volume two of our report explains that decision. It explains that under long standing department policy a president, president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office that is unconstitutional charging the president with a crime was therefore, not an option. We could consider that is the opposite final position. And we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the president. And if you remember nothing else, remember this, what I'm about to tell you a direct consequence of the first thing I mentioned, if the DOJ cannot indict the president, what happens with the evidence of any potential presidential crime is not a trick question presidents Johnson, Nixon and Clinton, they all know and anyone who has studied those areas, or live through them, they all faced congresses, which considered impeachment. Muller, did not say the I word I don't think anyone was bracing for that today. That's not how Bob Muller roles. But remember, the other thing he did today reiterating this key passage from the mullahs report, which states only congress accuses a sitting president of criminal conduct. The opinion says that the constitution requires a process other than the criminal Justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing Muller's entire address today was positioned within the rules he had to follow. I can tell you, I'm thrilled that in a few moments, we'll be joined by the man who wrote those very rules. Former Obama DOJ official Neil Cacho, but I want to begin with this panel Maya Wiley, former council, the mayor of New York City, and a former prosecutor in the southern district of New York, John Flannery form, a former counsel to three congressional investigations and Eugene Robinson Pulitzer prize winning columnist for the Washington Post. It is a historic night. I really appreciate each of you starting off our special coverage. John as a prosecutor versed in the interplay between the DOJ and the congress, what was Muller saying in your view about, what should be done with his report and evidence. I think he said you should treat. My report as my testimony and go forward Seneca, said that the fates lead you to your destiny or drag you to it. I think when he wasn't answering bars misstatement of his investigation he was saying to congress, I referred this to you and think about it. I mean, the House Judiciary committee, going to interview five hundred witnesses issue all those subpoenas. And they know the clock is running in one of the most obvious articles of impeachment is the refusal by the president to comply with requests for discovery for documents and witnesses, so they already have one point of five to ten and this is without considering other misconduct, by the White House. So I think what he's saying is it's time to do something. It's time to go to work. It's time to have if you will a probable cause hearing and decide what the articles of impeachment are, and then try with the five to twelve witnesses in the Senate. With Robert says the chief judge my he also spoke about the grave threat posed his view by obstruction of Justice. Take a look. It was critical for us to obtain full and accurate information from every person, we questioned when a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation or lies to investigators. It strikes at the core of the government's effort to find the truth, and hold wrongdoers accountable. What was he doing there in your view and having covered so much of this story with us? What did you think watching Bob Mueller? Step out there today. I thought Bob Muller was doing exactly what Bob Muller does best. He is a subtle communicator around the fact that there is no exoneration on obstruction of Justice in this context with volume two of the report, you know, even in terms of all, you one when it comes to that Trump Tower meeting on June ninth, he, he says, in his report that one of the reasons they can't charge a campaign finance conspiracy as because of obstruction, so you also have to read the two volumes together. And I think what he's saying is exactly, as John said. It's like the evidence is there, I gave it to you do something with it do something and read it read it, gene Robinson listened to Bob Muller today. Imploring the public in. Again, this was really something imploring, the public to perhaps do more than many of our leaders ask than certainly people often feel like the level of discourse and here was a man who obviously feels that he's worked hard. He served his country. He does not want to be drawn into political sniping. He does not see his role as political, but he is asking us to do something. Take a look at his request. Beyond these few remarks. It is important that the offices ridden work speak for itself any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report. We chose those words carefully and the work speaks for itself. And the report is my testimony, I would not provide information beyond that which is already public in any appearance before congress chain. Well, a couple of things I, you know, let me let me start with the where he started basically, which was with the Russian interference, it was clear from the, the entire performance by molar today that he considers this an emergency. He considers this, a very serious effort by Russia to interfere with our election that had happened that it's going to happen again. You want people to pay attention to that second. The message to congress was was cleared. Now, I wish. He were a bit less subtle communicator, famous double negative, right? The evidence did not show that the president did not commit a crime any editor, Jean hundred with that same Pulitzer, gene. I'm not sure I don't know what you mean. Exactly, exactly. I'm not sure you don't know either any editor would slash out. Those two negatives and say the evidence shows the president committed a crime because that's what it shows the crime of obstruction of Justice. He lists all that evidence, much, much evidence in the report, any, any, any basically tells congress, it's update puny act. You can either act or you can say, never mind, whatever you do, though. Pay attention to the fact that our election was interfered with, and it's going to happen again. I want the whole panel hang with me as I bring on his promise Neil Kochav. Because when we talk about congress, you have at least forty members of the House Democratic caucus. And now, one Republican, we're on the record for at least impeachment proceedings. Then you have democratic leadership Pelosi Nadler, not on the record for even after today. Instead, they're saying, well what they really need next is Muller to testify, and he made it clear that's not where he's headed. Now I hope and expect this to be the only time that I will speak to you in this manner. I am making that decision myself. No one has told me whether I can or should testify or speak further about this matter. There has been discussion about an appearance before congress any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report. That's Muller's warning shot. You're not gonna get a lot more out of me if you make me testify in public, but in saying that no one's holding him back. He obviously is defending in effect his boss, Mr. bar in the Trump administration that has been accused in many people feel credibly accused of interfering with aspects of this probe and thus perhaps there was concerned they would interfere with Muller. That's not all on a narrow point. But an important one Muller goes out of his way to thank bar for his handling of all this. Torney general then concluded that it was appropriate to provide our report to congress and to the American people. At one point in time. I requested that certain portions of the report be released. The attorney general preferred make prefer to make the entire report public, all at once and we appreciate that. The attorney general made the report largely public and I certainly question the attorney general's good faith in that decision. Good faith on the release. The report as promise Neil Kochav, former acting solicitor, general, the United States who wrote those very rules that the special counsel continually cited and invoked as part of the restrictions and the authority that he exercised today. Neil always great to see you. Thank you for being with us on this night. Big picture. What do you think was important about what Muller said to the public today, given that large parts of it or familiar to you? And those who read the report. I think it's a pretty devastating day for President Trump. I think President Trump had hoped that attorney general bars up. This station of what Muller actually concluded would carry the day, people would kind of go home and forget, but there's been a drumbeat over the last weeks and leading up to Justin marshes. The Republican member of congress saying, hey, these are crimes in their impeachable offenses. And so all of that together, I think, has led Muller to come out today and say, you know, people are spending this, and all sorts of ways, and this is not what I said, in, so I disagree a little bit with what you just said before about how Muller gave bar kind of clean Bill of health and said it was okay. His conduct in general. Muller used words. He's just on the release just on the report, just just on the reports release and, you know, he didn't say anything about how bar got the obstruction of Justice stuff. Right. Or anything else, but he did not let me press you. Me press you on the deal today. Let me press you on that because this is something people at home, and I think around the country wondering I was talking to various sources people close to this today about it. There is a view that in the way Mr. bar released the information about the report and purported to issue, a ruling a judgment on whether or not to charge the president that, that is in direct contradiction with what Miller just said today, that the DOJ can't indict the president. And yet Muller. Also, I think what way out of his way I'm curious your view way out of his way to present some sort of comedy, some United front with bar. He never said, well, I respect him but we disagree about some of this. Now, it was like a thin ground of comedy. Only on one issue, which is the public release the document. And after all, remember Muller is the subordinate to attorney general bar. The very fact that he's even having a press conference. And talking about this suggests to me, something pretty serious is afoot. And I mean, really know this because Muller, did two things today he plucked out to parts of his report. And sure they were there before, but this is what he chose to emphasize number one. He said, I can't indict a sitting president, even if I wanted to the even if the president was guilty as sin, I couldn't do it. And number two, I can clear him. I could have if the evidence was there. And by the way, the evidence was not there. So those two things together to me suggest really kind of repudiation of what bar is doing certainly Muller saying, look, I can't indict the president. But I can you know you can write a report and you can read it for yourself since he what it says, I also can't indict bar. He's my boss, but you can read my report. And then compare it to what bar said and draw your own conclusions, and all of this is a setup to congress because Muller is writing this report against the backdrop of the Watergate in, whitewater investigations which were after all turned over to congress for their investigation. And that is what I think Muller is saying between the lines today. Neil as, as always lays it out, quite clearly, gene, as to the point about congress. Let me play a sitting member of congress who when pressed on this program says most of his colleagues, haven't read the report, take a look. Your question about that. Would you try to answer me, honestly, always be I swear to God. Well, sir, do you think the majority of members of congress have read the Miller report? No. I don't. Gene, you take Muller's aspirations or hopes. You take Neil's breakdown of the purpose of all this, and then you take a congress that allegedly according to some has not widely read the report and it handle the nuance that Muller was was resting his argument on today. Well, we'll see if they can handle the nuance if they would read the report. I mean. What, what do we pay them for right? We'd we do pay them to do their jobs. And it's their job to read the read this report, and they should read it. And then I think members of congress should ask themselves a question, and this isn't necessarily a legalistic question. But if you if you're not going to indict excuse me, if you're not going to start an impeachment and king into Donald Trump. Imagine tell me describe the president for whom you would start an impeachment inquiry. Right. I mean, a president who abused power president who use the instruments state to go after his political enemies, the president who lied to the American people all the time, maybe ITO described this hypothetical president, who, who does something that Donald Trump doesn't do all the time. I'll let that breathe for a second on a big night. A moment of reflection. Because you, you put it you put it down genius say this report, which Muller was really just going through the biggest takeaways from this in about nine minutes. Neil more dramatic person, and we've seen some more talkative loquacious types in law enforcement before could have done a lot more with it. He aired completely on the side of cairn reticence. But to genes point is he saying to congress, what more do you want me to do? And what greater conduct of use of power in that the laws be faithfully executed. Would you want if you ever, we're going to get to this point against the sitting president? Exactly are, and I think there's one key tell which is Muller's emphasis on, I can't a sitting president because it'd be unconscionable, every scholar who's taken that view in the Justice department when they did in those two opinions said the remedy to make sure that the president is above. The law is one thing impeachment. And so when you invoke the I can't indict a sitting president, you are invoking, suite of Thorndike's that says the remedy is a simple one, it is impeachment. I don't mean to say it's a simple process. That's the remedy that our founders had in mind and I take jeans point. Exactly. I mean, what are you there for, if not to stand up for the rule of law for a president who doesn't break the law, and intimidate witnesses offer pardons and all the other stuff? That's outlined in the report. There are now a thousand federal prosecutors former prosecutors who said, if I'm really I've read the report, and I would indict all of these. Things. Green with all. That was say, I just think we have to add one more point here, which is for Robert Muller after writing this report after doing the two years of investigation after bringing all these indictments after writing a report in which he explicitly says that there's this other path that and now today makes very clear we were never going to consider this from prosecutorial lens. We were only going to look at this as preservation of evidence and is essentially giving congress allowing the other process to go forward as it relates to Trump in a footnote. He explicitly says, by the way, congress also has in addition to impeachment the question of whether it wants to tighten up these laws. So for Bob Muller to actually say I'm done here. I don't wanna testify, you know, the book by Muller is the only testimony, you get is actually, to ignore the very. Thing he lays out and footnote, one thousand nine hundred eighty one which is congress actually has two jobs to do here. Consider impeachment and also consider, whether or not it has to consider legislation to make clearer how we have appropriate oversight if a president possibly committed crimes. You heard a digging in the crates. Have you ever heard of that? It means to look up old records Flannery and ten ninety one thank you. My ten ninety one says a possible remedy through impeachment for abuses of power would not substitute for criminal liability after a president leaves office, Maya Wiley digging into the footnotes to remind us that Bob Muller. If you read the report, which he asked you to do today uses the I-word, and post-presidential criminal indictment is both things that need to be considered. But as, as you say, my, the questions whether congress will make him have more this conversation in public than he wants their Coequal branch, they can make calls that he might disagree with got to fit in a break. Neil Cacho and mile Wiley. Thank you both so much. John gene will be back later in the hour coming up. I'm going to do a special breakdown on what this means for Congress's approach to potential impeachment. After Miller's message today and new questions tonight about Muller and bar, and the apparent daylight between them, even as we point out Muller was very careful not. To make that a focus of his remarks later in the hour. And this is important. When you look at a day like today, what molar didn't say legal experts are going to break down, why that's so important. And a key warning about the ongoing threat from bladder, MIR Putin. I'm Ari Melber. You're watching a special edition of the beat on MSNBC. Hi, it's Katy Tur want to keep up with MSNBC while you're on the go. Subscribe to the MSN be daily newsletter. You'll get the best of what you've missed or in this unprecedented era of news, text MSNBC two six six eight six six to subscribe. Bob Muller breaking his silence today to resign and hand off any further work to congress. The opinion says that the constitution requires a process other than the criminal Justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing. Muller flatly suggesting this is now only Congress's job, not the prosecutors or the press or the voters, but congress to decide if and whether high crimes committed by Donald Trump, so you could Pelosi not breaking any new ground today in response, while the chairman, who would oversee any impeachment probe Jerry Nadler stepped out here to respond. We do spec to impeachment question at this point. All options are on the table and nothing should be ruled out what special counsel. Mother said loud and clear today for the American people is that President Trump is lying when he says, no collusion. No obstruction, and that he was exonerated and that the constitution points to congress to take action to hold the president accountable, that's exactly what we will do. What is accountability Muller says that's for congress to decide not to outsource those judgments back to him? Or ask him go any further. Then he didn't his written report and Miller used this new rare speech today to basically warn the House, Democrats. They won't get an ounce. More from him if they subpoena testimony. I hope and expect this to be the only time that I will speak to you in this manner. There has been discussion about an appearance before congress any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report. Now, we're expects for itself. And the report is my testimony. The work speaks for itself. That's vintage Mullah right there. And he's echoing a classic legal concept that some things speak for themselves lawyers often, quote, this point in Latin recipes that local or to stress, how some evidence is so clear, you don't need to talk over Shakespeare, even famously invoked, the same idea to stress the limits of rhetoric one character proclaiming. What shall I say more than I have inferred? And this idea may be a rarity in our politics and society Muller, arguing today, his work does not require more words or inferences, the work exists. It speaks and Miller saying the only question left is what to do about it. Any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report? Now, we're expects for itself, and the report is my testimony. Former federal prosecutor Seth Waxman is here, along with Eugene Robinson. Seth what does that mean to you, why think Mr Miller has said that he's made his findings? He's laid down the gauntlet essentially in front of congress and is looking to congress to do its thing now, congress will bring in witnesses, and hopefully look at these documents this isn't being done in a vacuum right now. We have Mr. Trump thumbing, his nose at congress, saying, you're not going to get these documents, you're not going to get these witnesses. So what's congress to do? Are they going to abdicate responsibility? And essentially confirm, what Trump's always believed that he could walk out onto Fifth Avenue suits, someone and there'd be no consequence. If this impeachment were to take place, and he were to be charged because at the end of the day, that's what impeachment is charging document, then you look to the Senate as to whether there's a possibility of him, getting removed, but. Let me let me focus you on, on the core molar claim here, which is, you know, his legal. I'm sure you've heard that expression before. Right. I have. And there is a rebuttal to that. Here. I'm going to not present, you know, just Trump folks who attack Muller, either which way, but a credible rebuttal by Michael to Maskey a very talented writer who on the left, and he says Muller wants the evidence to speak for itself. The evidence, however was not allowed to speak for itself as he knows the attorney general spoke for it is, Bob Muller still playing by old rules on an imaginary neutral playing field when it's actually distorted an uphill from Bill bar and left to their own devices that leaves him sliding underground why think Mr. Moore thought today was evening that playing field where he came out made some very specific directed targeted comments to essentially say, look, the evidence is there just read it and do your job. So I think he may have leveled that playing field. I would, frankly, like to see Mr. MO. To a degree. I mean, bring in Jeanne because you're the careful prosecutor gene is the careful chronicler of Washington, gene. There are other prosecutors who also operated under these rules has similar rules who've come out and spoken more directly listed off. You know he didn't even mention today and again it's his call. I'm not second guessing, but I'm asking you if what we're to believe is that this is the last time he ever wants to speak than gene. Why didn't he say? By the way, we busted up a crime spree by Trump aids. The president's campaign chair and lawyer, and national security adviser are all convicted felons. Now Roger stone was hiding allegedly contacts related to stolen emails that were involved in, in tipping the election. And that's the destruction and we don't know what else we didn't get. He didn't do any of that y gene, or Jim would love to have been rubber Mola's editor. I would have had plenty of suggestions for how he might have done this. Nonetheless, I do agree that, that this, this was his way, I believe of, of leveling the playing field. He realized that his work had been distorted had been misrepresented, and that people hadn't read the report and, and by selecting the points to highlight that he highlighted, I think he did go considerable, way toward sort of getting the discussion back where he wanted it where he thinks it should be, you know, that said could he have done it in a punchier way? Absolutely. There's no question about them and substantively there were things. He just didn't get into Warner. The Senator is pushing pass what Muller said and saying, look, it's not his call. He may have to testify take a look. When it becomes a private citizen. There will be those in congress probably led by the house. That words him, but testify, and I think he'll have a responsibility to do something. Your view. Seth I entirely agree with that. Bob Muller by reputation by experiences his a renowned and well respected individual, but no one's above responding to a subpoena. And there are countless questions that are left on answer. You know why didn't Don junior testify. Why didn't the president testified those parts of the reporter redacted was it because they plead the fifth or told they were going to be pled. The plead the fifth. I mean impeachment is a political process. It does not have to arise to criminal conduct to constitute impeachment grounds. So if the American people, and congress were to here, for example, that the president of the United States was invoking, the fifth that, that could be something that could be considered many other questions. So having Mr. Moore, speak today was obviously very telling and it raises a lot of questions and, and gives the American people feel for what happened, but testify under oath in front of congress would be that much more eliminating, I think it's owed to the American people. And congress, gene Robinson said wax. Thank you both up ahead. Democrats calling for this testimony win a look at what Muller didn't say. And why that could matter so much also are definitive breakdown of despite Muller's careful and polite presentation, we have the receipts in the facts of the way he rebutted, Mr. bar, and the Trump DOJ when we're back in thirty seconds. In his first ever public remark to special counsel today. Bob Muller addressed why there was no conclusion about whether Donald Trump actually committed the crime of obstruction and in the process, he went forward in ways that would suggest contradictions of his boss, which is someone who's worked with for decades. Of course. Now attorney general Bill bar Muller saying the Justice department has rules that prevent the charging of a sitting president with a crime, no matter what evidence they find mirrors what Muller, of course, wrote in the report, but it also differs in the takeaway if not in the careful lawyer ease of what bar told everyone in April emphasizing that Muller bar said didn't find a crime at all. And that was there for up to bar and bar loan to then make some sort of charging decision. And then, of course, as you know, he concluded that he says there was no reason to charge Donald Trump Muller today makes it clear he decided early on. He wouldn't even go down the road of that type of question. We specifically asked him about the O L C opinion. And whether or not he was taking the position that he would have found a crime, but for the existence of the O L C opinion, and he made it very clear. Several times that that was not his position. So that was just a department policy. Those were the principles under which we operated and from them, we concluded that we would would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime a mullah's report, he also suggested this is all too congress. We concluded. He writes the congress has the authority to prohibit presidents corrupt use of it. Thority Melissa striking. A similar note today in comments that appeared to break with bar. Especially council Muller did not indicate that his purpose was to leave the decision to congress. I am told that his reaction to that was that it was my, my prerogative as attorney general to make that decision. The opinion says that the constitution requires a process other than the criminal Justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing, I am joined now by Matt Miller, who has set up exactly the kind of press conference as you just saw there, the Justice department and former prosecutor, John Flannery, Matt, what was Muller getting at in the careful way that he laid out his arguments while stressing to the extent that it came up that he was not. He says questioning Mr. bar. Well, you know, he I think he was making clear when he said that about he didn't wasn't questioning Bill bars. Good faith. He was really confining that those remarks to a very specific thing to Bill. Bars not exercising good faith in. The way he released the report. But I do think his by choosing to use the words, he did he set a lot of things about his report today, he chose to make these various specific remarks about why he didn't make a determination. I think that was pretty clearly to correct the public record in the same way that he thought the initial letter that Bill bar sent to congress had left of mis impression with the American public, we know that because he wrote a letter complaining, I think he today, wanted to set the record straight, because Bill bars press conference and subsequent testimony to congress and his interviews with Fox News had left misimpression with the American poet. Now, anyone that has read the Muller report would have known that, what Bill bar said and those clips, you just showed was misleading but a lot of people have the report misleading, and that's, that's what I am. This is not that thing when I'm just asking questions really genuinely trying to understand this that because I'm gonna play for you. Some of the things Mr. bar said that even if technically arguably defensible, they left people, and the public and plenty of experts. With the impression that bar was saying Muller, didn't find enough criminal evidence. And that's not what Muller said, take a look. He reiterated several times in a in a group meeting that the he was not saying that, but for the opinion he would have found obstruction if the special console found facts sufficient to constitute obstruction of Justice. Would he have stated that finding? If he had found that then I think he would stay at. Yes, that yes or no on may. I did bar have reason to know that, that statement was not accurate. Yeah. Of course, he did look bar Muller had said in the report that it would be unfair for me to accuse the president of a crime even. And that's what you know what bars saying there that, you know, he doesn't think Muller would would would have said that, well, he, he specifically said, not only not charge a president, but because I can't charge a president. It's unfair for me to accuse him because there's no way for him to clear his name in court. So I hated. Hey to draw you out mad on potentially breaking with the your esteemed colleagues at the Justice department, but several outlets including MSNBC has reported today, that the molar Justice department officials have said, no, they were releasing material to show. There was no conflict on that very point between bar and Muller. What do you say to that? You know, there's a lot of internal politics that goes on inside the Justice department. I don't know how that statement came to be. I don't know who asked to put it out. I wouldn't want to speculate. But if you just look at the facts. You don't think it flies? I don't think it flies. Let me in. Yeah, there's no way you can look at what he said, Kamila Miller says it doesn't fly, it's my job. The report, what we're hearing. So when we hear from someone from the molar side, that they were trying to demonstrate unity, I'm going to report that we're hearing that I'm also going to report, the receipts Flannery, which look like that's really hard to square because I just showed you the attorney general United States under oath to the congress acting like had there been more evidence molar could have and would have said, oh, the president committed a crime, which is the opposite of the report it is the opposite of the report. And like you said, it's only witches that fly, I suppose, I mean you have to deny what your eyes see years here from bar in contradiction to Muller Muller. Maybe a half speed to elegant and his argument in the sense that he contradicted the four-page misleading letter than it is March twenty seven th letter. He said, you've misrepresented my, my investigation, and today, he set the record straight. And on the one hand we had bar- trying to. Delay the world knowing what the report was really about both by that four page letter. And by the slow release of the report that does not the find objection in in Muller. And then you have ironically enough, you have the congress leadership sort of assuming the, the mantra, if you will have car pay Montana. And if anything is true about today's pronouncement by Muller, it is get moving is there. It is has it for you. Carpeting Montana is impressed. And instead of carpet, diem got. I got. I figured, you got it, but, you know, some people in the Justice department don't understand what Muller said. So maybe sometimes we have to explain I work. One piece at a time I go, slowly. But that I mean this, this really gets to the heart of it, right? Because at the end of the day. Bob Muller was authorized to look at a lot of stuff. But the highest profile most pivotal, call related to the potential criminal evidence against the president that, yeah, that's right. And it also the can thing is what ought to be done about that. And that's why what Bill bar said was so important. Bill bar, basically said the case was closed. And when he was asked at that press conference if Muller didn't make this determination, because he thought it ought to be left to congress. He said, well, I would hope that would not be his opinion because that's not our job is prosecutors our job is to make determinations and Muller was saying in his report and saying very clear today in this one special instance, when the president, not anyone else that one person who can't be indicted it is our job. The constitution says, and the oil, seep Pinon says that we are supposed to leave that to congress. And that is so important because it means the case is not closed the cases open for congress to pick up and run with it. They want to and so given the nuances of this kind of communication, because the job you how this is different from most other agencies that are secrecy rules Muller operated with. Menace secrecy. He worked off site from the DOJ, and all the rest and the end is your view that Bob Muller, could not necessarily match the communication skills and challenges of this particular environment with all of the tremendous legal skills, and unquestioned integrity, he had during the investigation because the result of what you're saying is that bar at a practical level was effective in part of what you described as duplicity look, I think Muller his team were acted appropriately but maybe of eventually a little bit naive. I wish that they would have come out and the special counsel would have made the statement he made today on the day that he transmitted his report to the attorney Joe now in his defense, it, you shouldn't expect eternal general to act in bad faith in the way that Bill bar did. So I I suspect they never expected him to act that way. So I don't really blame them for what they did. But it would have been the better course of action to pain control. This story from the get go to make sure no one. Else could take ownership of it. Well, the, the constraint on Muller, though, is he abides by the law, and we had an attorney general who is nothing more than a spokesperson for the defendant or subject of the investigation. And I think that facts are stubborn thing to go back to John Adams, and that these facts, stubbornly, persists, the question that we have to face, we don't need a tree. We need a triage that is we shouldn't be chasing Muller to have him testify, when he's what he's going to do that sphere, and we covered that on the testimony earlier in the show. John, let you go. Let me press you on that your arguing that molar is Batman and bar is the joker, and you have a fight between someone who follows the rules and someone who does not in your extended analogy. You have the joker saying, well that's the rule. You're going to have to break, but your argument does cut against what Muller painstakingly did today, which was to the extent. He addressed it at all. He. Presented unity with bar, not a joker like battle. Well, every hero has his faults the tragedy. But this can yet the classic comedy in the sense that we can overcome the tyrant that sits in the west wing using the facts that he found elsewhere. In his report does every hero live long enough to become a villain. Not all heroes become villains. But we all have character flaws. All right. Let me just quickly say, I'm not asking wouldn't ask Bob Muller to go the full, Jim Komi. But Batman, also knew when to kind of stretch the rules a little bit. We'll leave it there mad at John. Thank you so much. I'm gonna finish quick break. But when we come back, there's some big questions at of the left open. Why? And why is that the key to understanding where we go next? We have all of that coming up. Bob Muller ju- line today, saying he doesn't intend to go beyond his written report in any public testimony. But somehow Democrats say tough, and there's a lot they may want to ask him about consider that Muller, didn't mention the thirty plus indictments is office issued in today's remarks. He didn't mention the six Trump aides from the campaign chair to Donald Trump's personal lawyer and Trump mortgage executive, who's sitting in prison right now, we're also did not address Donald Trump's attacks on the probe including not only the efforts to remove molar, which are in the report, but a lot of other public comments and attempts to obstruct, he also didn't address Bill bars conclusion that Muller's evidence failed to establish Trump committed obstruction. Think about what a big deal that is because we've been talking and reporting tonight about the space between bar and Muller Muller didn't even come it on the way that bar. Did that implying that it was his call to say there was nothing to be charged and also the Miller did not? Not really address most of the elements of this Pacific accident. He investigated about obstruction. Muller also said only congress can formally accused the sitting president of wrongdoing. Today he never used the I-word in his remarks. Although as eagle-eyed Maya Wiley, and others appointed out even just on this broadcast. It's something he did discuss at least in the footnotes of his report, so given all those open questions, we want to dig into what's left, unsaid. I am joined by NBC's, Julia Ainsley, who has decamped from her post at the Justice department to our Washington bureau, and we're thankful for the part of our coverage. And former federal prosecutor, Glenn Kirshner who worked directly for Bob Muller and the district of Columbia, US attorney's office, Glenn, you obviously have come on here before and praised Bob Muller and many people understand that what even you I would have to admit there were things that he chose not to address today that could have been useful. Ari I'm going to make the case controversial though, it may be that, Bob Muller, does not need to testify before congress. And here's why first of all, prosecutors don't testify about what witnesses said in courtrooms around the country every day. Judges instruct juries that the words of a prosecutor in the words of a defense attorney are not evidence. The evidence are the words that come from the mouths of the witnesses. That's point number one. We don't need Bob Muller to say. Oh, Don Mcgann told us that the president told him to fire special counsel. And when he refused, the president told him to lie we need. Don, Mcgann to say that to the American people into congress, number two, I suspect that a congressional appearance by Bob Muller would turn into a circus. The Democrats would probably want to ask him about. Oh, I don't know Hillary Clinton's emails and the Democrats. And the democrat twenty one point number one is important because as. You say, we're not looking to do a lot of hearsay and redo point. Number two, I'm gonna call you on. That's a fine argument against congressional hearings for now. And for a long, while the way they go before it turns to Julia, I want you address the issue in today's remarks, he did choose to speak about certain things. He downplayed any issues with Donald Trump's handpicked AG, do you think it would have been more constructive to meet them head on? I mean I would love to have a beer with Bob Muller and for twelve hours here everything that he thinks about the pro but that, that great intro that you did with all of those questions are there. All interesting. They're all things we want to know the answer to, but none of them go to the core of whether this president committed impeachable offenses, and to get to that, and to call away everything else, we need the witnesses. Julia. You've had a front row seat. You have been dealing with a lot of the primary, folks close to this. What is your view of those unanswered questions? And as we reflect on this day, what's, what's your view of what we've learned? Well, I think we've learned that Robert Muller, did leave the door wide open to congress to come in and answer some of these questions because you're right. He didn't get into the I-word. He really hasn't answered the fundamental question that he was charged with was, which was did the president commit a crime. Now he went back today and said that he was appointed to find out if there was conspiracy between the Russian government and the Trump campaign. And so it was worthwhile to look at all of these things, even if you couldn't indicted sitting president because there are people around the president who need to be investigated, and it's important to memorialize the evidence of sue haven't, and not wait until this president is out of office. And of course, he wanted to explain what he wanted to look at obstruction because that is at the heart of our Justice system. But the, the key, quote that we all jotted down in real time as quickly as we could is that he said, the criminal Justice system is not the place to write the, you know, this part of the criminal Justice system. Is not the place where you take the wrongdoings of a president. So he's leaving that door wide open. Again, to be clear is not the impression that bar left when he said, oh, it's a jump ball, I gotta deal with it. So, so important, I want to play one more part of Muller since it was him. Speaking out his Glenn. Do you know the expression word is bond? Word is bond. Sure, Bob Muller gave his version of that here. And I think it bears repeating we touched on this earlier in our coverage. But for viewers around the country, watching he is saying very clearly. My word is my bond. My report is my testimony. And as as you've been arguing Glenn, it's now time for congress to put up or maybe shut up take a look. No, I hope and expect this to be the only time that I will speak to you in this manner. There has been discussion about an appearance before congress any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report. No work speaks for itself. And the report is my testimony, Glenn your bottom line. His his word is his bond has reported his testimony. And now we can spend lots of time over the coming weeks, debating whether Bob Muller, Willer won't testify will it be public behind closed doors or a hybrid. Or we can focus on why the White House is trying to prevent people from coming before congress and testifying when frankly, they have no right to stomp down on those witnesses that I think, is what people should be focusing on at this point. And julia. I'm over on time, but in a sentence, or to do you think this is the last time we'll hear from Bob Muller on this issue it appeared to be so that the last thing I would say that to glens point? When the president says congresses having a do over it's clear from Robert Muller that it's not a do over intact. It might be the necessary course of action Glennon. Julia, thank you so much. And we'll be right back. We one more thing. Russian intelligence officers who are part of the Russian military launched a concerted attack on our political system. The releases were designed and timed to interfere with our election and to damage a presidential candidate. Bob Muller gets the final word. They're speaking to the stakes of his investigation in Russian meddling that he indicted that does it for a special coverage new from meet the press that Chuck Todd cast. It's an insider's take on politics, the twenty twenty election and more candid conversations with some of my favorite reporters about things we usually discuss off camera. Listen for free wherever you get your podcast.

Donald Trump Muller president congress President Trump congress Bob Muller Muller Bill bar Muller Muller Robert Muller prosecutor special counsel attorney Justice department Trump Muller gene Robinson John Bob Mueller
WSJ Investigation Finds Vale Was Warned Before Fatal Dam Collapse

WSJ What's News

12:37 min | 2 years ago

WSJ Investigation Finds Vale Was Warned Before Fatal Dam Collapse

"Striking scenery, world-class, music, and film festivals. And authentic. Character are just a few reasons why telluride Colorado is a favorite summer destination. Telluride offers endless outdoor activities. Catering to all passions and tastes. For more information, go to visit telluride dot com slash W s j. A Wall Street Journal investigation has found that managers at Iran or giant valley were warned about a Brazilian damn before it's devastating collapse in January that left two hundred seventy people dead. And this station, we found out that many of the minds wack is new dangerous, and they say that would collapse. So the Ida cut quiet because nut jobs. All they told manages and they recognized plus President Trump responds to Robert Muller's public statement and the US measles outbreak breaks. A new record. This is what's news from the Wall Street Journal. I'm Anne Marie for totally and New York before we get to our exclusive story about volley. Here are some other top stories we're following today. President Trump is attacking the credibility of Robert Muller, a day after the special counsels, first public comment, since the release of his report, Trump spoke at the White House Thursday before leaving for Colorado. Flicked it version, I think Muller is eight to never Trumper. He's somebody that dislikes Donald Trump Muller said Wednesday that charging the president with the crime was not an option due to Justice department rules. He also underscored that Russia's interference in the two thousand sixteen presidential election was systemic. President Trump has denied that Russia aided his campaign. Get elected, you know, got elected, you know, who got elected. I got elected Russia didn't help me at all Russia. If anything, I think helped the other side, the house has launched several investigations into the Trump administration and is considering whether to pursue impeachment. A US measles outbreak has broken a record with nine hundred seventy one cases reported so far this year. The previous record of nine hundred sixty three cases was set in nineteen Ninety-four the US centers for disease control and prevention says, if the number of cases continues to rise through the fall. It may no longer be considered to have been eliminated in the US most of this year's cases have been linked to outbreaks in New York City, and Rockland county where the virus spread mostly among unvaccinated children in ultra orthodox Jewish communities. Former Mississippi Senator Thad Cochran has died after a long illness. Cochran Republican was elected to the Senate in nineteen. Seventy eight and served forty years in the chamber before his resignation last year due to poor health. He served as chairman of the Senate appropriations committee twice and helped steer millions of dollars in federal aid to the Gulf Coast in two thousand five after Hurricane Katrina time magazine named him, one of the ten best senators in two thousand six he was eighty one years old. Striking scenery, world-class, music, and film festivals. And authentic. Character are just a few reasons why telluride Colorado is a favorite summer destination. Telluride offers endless outdoor activities. Catering to all passions and tastes. For more information, go to visit telluride dot com slash W. S. J. A Wall Street Journal investigation into a fatal dam collapse. In Brazil has revealed managers at valley were warned about unsafe conditions before the collapse. The Wall Street Journal's Charlie Turner has more. It was a catastrophic dam collapse. Sending mud roaring into the valley below the January twenty fifth dam failure at Broome, gene ho, Brazil resulted in two hundred seventy people being buried to death the dam held wasted a mind owned by Brazilian iron ore giant valley an investigation by the Wall Street Journal found that several of the mines workers, warn their bosses the dam was structurally unsound, and about to collapse, and they were ignored joining us now via Skype with this Wall Street Journal exclusive is the journal Samantha Pearson. Samantha you talked to survivors of victims of the collapse. And some of the stories were heart-rending all of the stories were heart-rending, what did they tell you? This is one of the several investigations that we've been dying at. Into the tragedy that happened are full months. The guy we've essentially been trying to find out the following who knew the time was dangerous and why when the necessary steps taken to protect the people working at the mine, and those living nearby. So in this in this investigation, we found out that many of the minds wack is done with dangerous, and they fit it would collapse. So they Ida cut quiet because these jobs. Oh, they told manages and they were ignored one of the main people that we focus on in this story is the mon- Kudo lava quill, he was the longest serving wek the mind he wasn't an engineer he badly finish school, so you can always, what should he knew that he had been what he had the might Edison system had been built in nineteen seventy six and he had never seen the things that he'd sought to, to see over the past couple of years, he'd, he'd sought to see leaks cracks stains? He'd started to put some box at the bottom of this two hundred eight foot High Dam to stop leaks, man him foot need died in. The tragedy. So we spike into several people who, who wouldn't who tried to win the manages, that this thing was about s- collapse. Samantha, what do they say supervisors, did or did not do? So valley denies all of this. They say they never cut costs on them security. They say that they would not to wed this was imminent risk of collapse. This obviously comes three years off to another dominate joined in, in the same state in Brazil also collapsed killing nineteen people. They say they doubled in almost doubled investment in management and basically tonight that they knew anything about this. That's a key acusations isn't it because valley has been accused of favouring cost-savings over making improvements to the damn exactly. So through through Sosa's through token to the prosecutors, we found several instances where the manages on engineas what under Prussia pops. No explicit pressure from from the huddle face, but implicit pressure to keep cost down. Those was higher. Tation of staff. They gained performance related barring says valley was also described to as a kind of very physically hyrax company way you never wanted to bring problems to your buses where people were constantly worried about getting fired. And this is I think tops, this is the most tragic putt. Because you may ask, you know why, why have you think this is gonna clap, why would you why would you continue to wack that? But you've got to remember this is Brazil, you know, this is the middle of nowhere in Brazil, these people reading don't have any other options, if they went waking body. They probably be still working the land, so they really really depend on the mining industry. They depend on, on volume, which is one of Brazil's biggest companies and there are ongoing investigations there have been ever since the collapse. Right. Exactly. So prosecutors have been working very hard since January to find out exactly these questions you know, he knew did the boat. We believe they've told us that they that taunting to fall criminal charges, perhaps, by July, the problem may have his tragic problem is that many. Witnesses died, many incident poets that would have been filed by people like will have quail people who act, the mind, destroyed when the mud, basically obliterated everything in the mind administrates, the administrative threat to the come teen, which is where most of the victims while having lunch when the dumb best. But they've now found two key witnesses who what people they tell us when people who, who technical people, they knew exactly about the dumb, they volley and they tried to warn that bosses in at the end of last year. Well, the they were note as well. These were whistle blowers these to whistle blowers. Exact Ken as we end on the these people are now key a key to kind of wiping out how far is information went up the company and what was done with his information whether it was ignored. I mean, just precise ignoble, whether it was a case of that the body was too slow to respond to this risk. And prosecutors told the journal they expect to file criminal charges against van. Valley certain individuals and the company's auditor, exactly. So valley used a German audience hut to to do a safety inspection of the dumb. The most recent one they did wasn't September last year and volley of you know explained that while they trusted this. Listen stuck to the I investigation, the journal dead found that the the safety. Inspect also had serious concerns about the time, but they will worried about losing a contract with valley, which is home. You know, start a she put in a company for these people, but also for for the whole industry, Wall Street Journal reporter Samantha Pearson joining us via Skype. Thanks a lot. Samantha, thanks very much. For more on this exclusive story. Visit our website at W S, J dot com. Now onto some more headlines from the Wall Street Journal. Federal Reserve vice chairman Richard Clarita says the US economy is in a very good place. But that the central Bank would consider cutting short-term interest rates if the outlook for global growth durken's, the fed has been holding rates steady, so for this year, but one big factor, that's complicating the outlook, the trade battle between the US and China Wall Street Journal's Nick Tim rose explains. Fed officials last met a thirtieth and may first and at that meeting, they actually left the meeting feeling more confident about the economic outlook and that followed a pretty bumpy stretch earlier in the year that prompted them to drop any bias toward raising interest rates. So go back before that meeting stock markets were near all time highs. The unemployment rate is near a fifty year low wages arising solidly, but not so fast to 'cause fears of unwanted inflation. And in fact, at the. The may meeting fed chairman, Jay Powell pushed back against market expectations of a rate, cut this year by pointing to reasons why they thought of slowdown in inflation might be temporary. But that'll happen about five days before trade talks between Beijing and Washington, broke down that led President Trump to raise tariffs on roughly two hundred billion dollars in goods to twenty five percent from ten percent in that really represents a significant escalation intentions. So the question now is are we in a different world from where we were just a month ago? And if it looks like the economy is going to slow more than fed officials already expect that it will does that put him in a position where they feel like they need to act. Tim rose says, geopolitical risks are complicating the feds careful calculus. The more the geopolitical risk picture, darkens, the more, the fed is going to have to consider g how comfortable. Are we sitting on our hands right here for right now? They do seem pretty comfortable with where things are, but the bond market has been reacting in a pretty pronounced fashion in the past few days yields on the ten year treasury note are down to their lowest levels in more than a year, and that really reflects how bond investors think that this is going to cause weakness in the global economy, and that it could force the fed to cut interest rates, the fed holds its next policy meeting in June on the eighteenth and nineteenth mortgage rates have fallen below four percent in what's considered a sign of a possible. Rebound in the housing sector mortgage giant, Freddie, MAC says the average rate this week on a thirty year fixed mortgage was at three point nine nine percent. The housing sector was a weak spot for an otherwise strong economy in two thousand eighteen and data for this year has so far been mixed. Fedex is expanding its delivery to seven days a week, beginning next year. Here. The company also plans to deliver more packages directly to consumers doorsteps rather than dropping them off, at local post offices. The changes come as the number of online ecommerce packages continues to rise. Fedex plans to expand to seven day a week deliveries in January for most US customers. That's what's news for this Thursday afternoon? I'm Anne Marie for totally for the Wall Street Journal.

The Wall Street Journal US Brazil President Trump fed Samantha Pearson Colorado Robert Muller Anne Marie president Donald Trump Muller Nick Tim rose Russia chairman giant valley Fedex Skype China Wall Street Journal Senate
Why Mueller could ask AG Barr to indict Trump in office

The Beat with Ari Melber

43:26 min | 2 years ago

Why Mueller could ask AG Barr to indict Trump in office

"And we begin tonight with a lot to get to. But also, what is clearly I can tell you this tonight the clues and these signs and the evidence of a turning point in the Muller probe. We are seeing indications that he is moving towards some kind of finish line. Let me show you the latest signal from the president. I mean who's been under scrutiny for two years. Struck a tone that let you decide for yourself, but he looked almost deliberately blase about how this Miller report could come out soon. That'll be totally up to the new attorney general. He's a tremendous manager Mendes. Person who really respects this country and respects the Justice department. So that'll be totally up to him. The new attorney the new attorney general totally up to him as if this was not a president who gets involved Donald Trump famously wanted to fire Jeff Sessions for not defending him enough against this lawful Russia probe now he claims he's hands off, but it's his handpicked attorney general who of course, we'll decide all of this. Now, if you look at the president there, and we don't do a lot of body language on this show. But he at least seems to be playing a role of someone who doesn't want to look tense. He seems like a man trying to events a certain lack of worry about where this is headed. And none of this is in a bubble. This was just six days ago that we got the vision of Bill bar being sworn in as the new attorney general facing there, the chief Justice and the man who he's investigating and the man that Muller has been investigating now last night Trump officially nominated bars deputy to replace. Man who had been overseeing this the most famous deputy attorney general in American history rod Rosenstein, meanwhile, NBC reported that Rosenstein would only step down. He'd only leave after Muller finished his work today. That's not all as I mentioned the clues. We're interested in the evidence. Not the rumors. The clues that Muller might be wrapping things up comes from here. A report by CNN on three different days last week that were workers and molars office carrying boxes pushing a cart of files out of their office. And that the grand jury, which indicted stone Manafort and others has not actually met in weeks. The last thing they did where the charges against stone. And some of the big cases that are moving forward. We see the other offices that could take it's like football. They could take a hand off. And then you have all this other action that I want to tell you about today before we bring in our experts and New York judge granting Michael Cohen more time before he reports to prison based on a surgery and his lawyer saying he is still preparing to testify important note. This was a prosecution that. Originally began, of course, with the Muller pro ended up back in New York. Roger stone goes face to face tomorrow with a judge that he at least mocked online. Maybe worse questions whether violated a gag order and he's not just being prosecuted again by Mellor's office. The handoff lawyers at the DC US attorney's office are involved. They can continue if Mullah wraps up. Now stone has been of course on this nonstop media blitz over the last few weeks, and he claimed memorably that he felt this was overboard. This was somehow a problem the lawful arrests that you see on your screen at his home in Florida when they executed the lawful arrest warrant, but compare that video stones arrest with his own online attacks on this federal judge will decide tomorrow his fate, and you can assess for yourself. What was really inappropriate what was really a potential threat? So tomorrow is a big big day in the Muller probe. No matter what. But what we don't know tonight is if it could be one of the last big days one of the last big hearings while Muller is still. Formerly on the job. So let's get into it with people who know their way around these very intricate issues. Former federal prosecutor John Flannery Ameri McEvoy, a former federal prosecutor who also represented Donald Trump's Debbie campaign chair. Rick gates in the Muller probe and brings that important relevant experience for the wider view of the politics of all this because the ending of any Miller probes going to have a lot of political reaction man who used to run the Democratic Party a governor a Dr Howard Dean. How're you doing governor doing great nice to see we're going to get to you Flannery? I begin with you based on the clues stipulating. What we don't know. What do you see significant about where this is headed now? Well, you know, I had a different reaction when you talk about all the documents being packed up and leaving the office. August think of was Watergate and which the team Rick Benveniste and others. They took documents off the out of the office because they feared what would happen to the. The office of it would be shut down and all that they had gotten would be lost. So I don't know. I mean, there've been so many advances in terms of search warrants and data that they found it still doesn't feel like they would do it except out of compulsion to issue a report now, and I think it's an involvement thing. I think the way any investigation works as you get more and more precise picture as time goes on. And I'm sure Muller's work that way, but whether or not he's going to have a report imminently, I know everyone around here, John are you analyzing or are you hoping? No, I think I'm analyzing. I why would all these documents leaves office when there's not a core proceeding that requires them like say, the Alexandria trial that doesn't make sense to me. And so I am I'm analyzing the facts as you have them available and presented them. With a with a grin to boot. I guess I'm a happy guy. Well, you know, he's happy lawyer Anne Marie. I think John is making what for many critics Donald Trump would be the best case scenario, and the idea that there's a lot more to go on what we do here is report the way things look, and there is evidence as I've just gone through that there's at least they possibility of Mullah wrapping up without more indictments that doesn't mean there might not be a report with all kinds of bad stuff about Donald Trump stuff that the house might wanna consider a lot of activities that if basically taken by any other human they would be called obstruction of Justice. And the question is what is our constitutional system. Do when the president's that, humid. But what do you think do you see it a little differently you or the person on the panel who's interacted with these folks, I think there's a very good chance that it may be winding down. Although it's very difficult to say, we're always reading the tea leaves trying to figure out what's happening. They do have a new attorney general. The attorney general is now in charge of this investigation. Muller reports up to him. He may say enough and shot it down we're done. And that may well be why they're taking boxes out. But it may also be that it will continue for some time. It's very hard to tell as a prosecutor you deal with all kinds of people trying to break the law and get away with it crime and cover up listen to another celebrated attorney who rose all the way to acting director of the FBI everyone's heard from this week because he put it in rather. Stark terms, not backward-looking about what anti McCabe says he saw on his book. But really the criminal overlap that he saw in the way Trump does business take a look. This is classic. Kind of criminal enterprise behavior. Right. You have a very strong leader who rules by force of will. And personality who demands unquestioned loyalty from those people around him. He's got to be sure that people are on his side. If you're not on his side, you're against him. And if you don't have that it's a threat to his very existence. Those are some of the same traits that I saw interacting with the president. And the folks in his administration what's notable about that is that is not mere criticism. That is not just punditry that is a window into the mindset of someone who actually at one point was making sure that was investigation of this president what you heard from him. Does that sound to you like the way that the prosecutors, and the investigators you dealt with in this probe were approaching this or could this wrap up with them saying, look, there's a lot of stuff we don't like, but we're not calling it a criminal enterprise. It's hard to say I mean, I only dealt with the Rick gates issues as far as the special counsels team. So we didn't talk about anything. Other than that. But. You have to remember too. When you're looking at McCabe. He the attorney the inspector general found that he lied on a number of instances, and he's trying to portray things in a way that's favorable to him. So people also feel sorry for him. And hopefully, we'll since you bring it up. Do you think he's lying now? It's hard to say. I mean, this is a guy who's lied so many times you sort of lose jobs. Not that hard to say. I mean, I'm asking you point blank or you just mentioning something to discredit him. Or are you saying that what he says now is lying? I I would I would appreciate a straight answer. I don't trust them that I tend to be a little cynical before. Prosecutor. When somebody's lied a few times under oath. I no longer trust what they say. So I would then take everything that they say without putting a lot of stock into it. And I also look at the fact of what circumstances then and he's in a circumstance right now where he's trying to get himself out of trouble because there was a criminal represents open probe in. That's an important context. You bring governor dean, your views any and all the above as well as how it's going to play in a town that has become obsessed with strong reactions to whatever comes out of the FBI. I think it's too early to say I mean, we love to speculate about this because it certainly high-drama particularly when McCabe said that he thought that he had an investigation to see if if the president of the United States was rushing asset that's something. We've never heard and the history of the Republicans far as I can tell or anybody any other foreign asset. But we just don't know. I mean, Miller's run a very professional quiet investigation with virtually no leaks whatsoever. And we can speculate all we want. But there is actually, unfortunately, very little evidence to to come to any conclusion. I think at this point about what's going to be in the investigation, and when it's going to appear let me ask you John on Roger stone, which is another big. Piece of this. And again, you can do the thought experiment. If an aide to George Bush or Barack Obama was indicted for all this terrible stuff. And then basically went and did these in really remarkably responsible attacks on the judge. And now tomorrow, the judge is going to rule and to put it in simple terms. He could get a warning you could get an even more restrictive gag order. He could get an ankle bracelet kind of like the rapper Rick Ross. If you remember his ankle bracelet. He could get a fine or or you could get jail. What do you think's going to happen there? Well, if I were the judge, and I'm sure the judges considered this part of his story that some aid did this that is suggesting he calls, it a Celtic cross a bullseye for a rifle shoot next to a picture, which certainly wasn't originally with that some aid did that without consulting with them. I'd want that person on the carpet to tell me if that conversation happened because I don't believe a thing that comes out of his. His mouth. I don't think anybody else does either the trickster the liar the manipulator, and he probably never expected. It would get caught up that he would get away with it. And then when he did he took it down, but put up the picture again, then took down the picture, and then apologize when he was caught and these conversions on the on the edge of being punished or portent. So if I were the judge I would be scrutinizing pretty carefully what he has to say not believing anything have to be persuaded. And I would consider obviously changing the conditions of his release the matter what he said, but on top of that if I suspected that he was lying as is. His course I think that I might suggest he spent a couple of days at the federal expense instead of wherever he's living right now. Right. I mean, any time in jail might disabuse him of the notion that this is a set and a platform for publicity Emory when you had your client dealing with this. It doesn't seem that. He followed advice. Nice to go out and hold all these press conferences, and and do it for the Graham as they say, and your client here is one of the people that is that is guilty. I want to put this terms of what we've learned you have Manafort, guilty gates guilty who you represented Flynn, guilty stone indicted, and of course, all the Russian nationals indicted in your view, having interact with this is where it ends was this still a really big deal. Or does this look to you like something that you would argue while serious is a lot of cover up what they call process crimes and not the underlying collusion. Well, it doesn't have a lot to do with Russia, and it doesn't it doesn't seem to. None of it seems to go back to Trump. They don't seem to make that connection between the Trump himself. So they don't seem to have that. It's serious crimes that he's committed the photo that he would with the crosshairs could be looked at as a threat to the judge or were to incite some sort of violence against her. If she looks at it that way, that's very serious too. And all of that will affect eventually if he is found guilty or pleads guilty the sentencing, so he could be looking at some serious time. And the fact that he did this now makes it worse. Governor Jean big picture. And if there is quote, unquote, no electric spiracy. No collusion. What do you take from? This is your argument is the Democrats argument. Yeah. Okay. There wasn't an international Watergate election conspiracy. There was just a ton of felonies by all of the top people Trump picked. Know, I don't think this the stanch of the Trump Trump family corruption is going to go away. No matter what happens. I think it'd be gets indicted, or if many of his people get diverted there may be impeachment hearings, depending on how much evidence there is. But you know, Trump as Trump's label is now corruption and his base is gonna love him. Anyway, and everybody else is going to hate him. And I don't think I don't see a big change in the status quo. Why do think there are number of people are going to jail, and I wouldn't rule out Donald junior. Very interesting Ameri. I should mention that Andy McCabe is going to be on the beat tomorrow night. Do you want me to tell him you said, hi. I wish him. Well. I hope it all works out for him. He he's in a lot of hot water, and it was more. It was a little bit more of a joke with your answering it seriously and you're a series prosecutor. But yeah, he's he's he's got a lot to deal with. No question of that. Well, you can't argue a case unless you hear every side, and we a benefit tonight from the wisdom of Emory McEvoy Howard, Dean and John Flannery. I wanna get you later in the hours to stick around. Keep the bow tie on state. Tv ready, sir. Up ahead. A nother lawyer for another Muller witness joins me to discuss exclusively Trump to furnish. The new attorney general is it true. What does it mean later, my special report that is so timely tonight? The breakdown of whether a president like Donald Trump could be indicted in office, a former DOJ official who wrote the special counsel rules will also be a part of our received wisdom later. This is so important we have in the show tonight. Eight fact check on immigration live from Mexico proving. Why Donald Trump is completely one hundred percent wrong on the factual basis for the emergency powers and later. Yes, I it earlier we're going to have the former acting FBI director Andy McCabe involved in the beat. I'm Ari Melber. We got a lot more stay with. Major news has everyone talking about the Mola report tonight. President Trump saying it is now up to the new attorney general Bill bar on what happens next. That'll be totally up to the new attorney general and he's a tremendous manager Mendes. Person who really respects this country and respects the Justice department. So that'll be totally up to him to do it turning the newest journey general totally up to him as we've been covering tonight. That's the kind of statement, you can interpret all sorts of ways. And if any of this is familiar, if you watch the beat it, maybe because we made a point to discuss the very same point that Donald Trump said on the record today with the Trump ally match lap last night because he made what many took to be an ominous prediction, the Bill would have some sort of quote effect on ending the molar probe, and thus it would quote and soon. One of his many jobs is to have the special counsel Reid him in on where doing is in the underline charge. But it's a simple statement. Look, there's no those. If it's a bit like he's going to do something because bar play. Nope. Or yet? Let's get into it. Heather mcgee's distinguished senior fellow at demos and knows her way around Washington as well, Jim Wallin is a former federal prosecutor who actually dealt with Muller. Prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, representing a former employee of a Trump digital linked firm. That was subpoenaed by Muller. Great to have you here. Thank you for you. See what Donald Trump said? Do you believe him? I do believe him. I believe him not because Donald Trump said it. But because I think the Bill Boers man of integrity, if the mullahs report has director circumstantial evidence that the president clued with Russia. Mothers releasing the report if there is no director circumstantial evidence of collusion. The president and bar would want to release the report anyway, but I believe that bar's going to make the decision on the merits. I haven't heard it put so succinctly that if it's bad for Trump Muller will definitely get it out. And if it's good for Trump, there's no conflict because the White House will want. It out. And do you. Do you see that in the coming weeks? I I don't know about in the coming weeks. I've I've seen the what I call speculation that it's coming to an end. There's a lot that we don't know. I mean, the Donald Trump junior. He's got to be interviewed. Right. He's central to the meeting at Trump Tower. It's hard for me to believe that they would conclude the investigation with you, raise you raise a very important point is prosecutors tend to do let's put up on the screen, the people that haven't at least ever been publicly confirmed as interviewed yet by Muller. Donald Trump junior. You mentioned Eric Trump Ivanka vice president Pence, who of course, was at least somewhat involved in the in the sanctions issues. John bold new joined later, Kellyanne Conway who lies constantly, but perhaps not under oath. Fair point there. Okay. I mean, we're all adults here. So when you look at that list, and then this parlor game that is backed by evidence. I mean, the reason why we lead tonight with the story that there are signs that Muller is moving is that the signs look real and you've dealt with them with this parlor game, and those people what does it tell you the perhaps they were interviewed. And we never heard about it. It's hard for me to believe that if they were interviewed someone on their side of the fence wouldn't have released the details, and we'll find out when we find out I suppose, but it just it seems to me that some of the signals may suggest that they're parts of that are ramping down. But my prediction is that. We're we're in for at least several more weeks if not a couple more months of investigation. That's interesting coming from you having represented someone directly contra this probe your views. I don't think we can sort of read the tea leaves about when this is going to come down. But I think what we do have is a sense of where the grass roots in this country right now where the order. Citizens have been watching this for the past two years who've been watching the slow trickle of damning information about the president's administration his campaign and about obstruction of Justice people are watching and they want to see the report, right? I mean, I think we have schoolteachers and people who normally are not reading legal reports wanting to know the truth from Robert Mueller, and so what is it? Good thing for civil society. It's a great thing for Robert Mueller tells them something that a lot of them don't want to hear I think that's important too. I think that's very doubtful. Given what we already know given the five out of six Trump campaign associates who have already pled guilty, given everything that we know about the communications between the Trump family and Russia how many times the president lied about his contacts with Russia. The vice president also lied about contacts with Russia. And so I think what's important is that the American people are going to be. In the streets. If the Muller probe is ended. And if there's anything that looks suspicious about the way that that ended under bar, and then also if we don't get to see all of the facts to Donald Trump, look extra children. Did you really did? Right. I mean, he said, you know, this guy. This guy is a tremendous man, right? We've seen this sort of cycle the flattery right of asking for loyalty. We know that William bar was on the record basically saying two things one that this. This entire investigation was something that he was suspicious of. And then more importantly, the idea that the president can't be indicted, which is not actually something that is settled law, and certainly supreme court has seen the other way. We're diving exactly into that question. It's so topical later tonight show. What did you learn dealing with the Muller? Prosecutors and I heard you dealt particularly with one of the fearsome ones, Andrew Weissmann Weizman. I knew when we were both in the US office twenty years ago. So many number of the people from the mother staff, they were extremely professional. They were very thorough. And and they looked to me is people that were simply trying to follow the facts theory of the case. Well, the witness that I dealt with was really unrelated to the central issues with respect to Trump and collusion and the like, well, his lawyer what else? I think that was your I don't expect you to say, well, the person I'm defending was the pin of the collusion. Go. But I did impress me as people. He he staffed Muller has staffed his team with people that are real professionals. They are dedicated most of them career public servants most of them a political. And so I think that what we're going to find is that they're feeling every single ground ball in a very wide field. And they're going to do a very very detailed report. And they're going to be some people that are disappointed by it. And there's some people that are going to reinforce their own beliefs at prejudices. But I think there'll be some surprises in there as well, Jim as someone who's represented witness in the pro it's great to have you here. Particularly these coming days. I hope you come back, and that we've seen you before we hope to see you again, thanks to both of you. And as there was just asking Kansas City, president be indicted. We have a special report on that. We're back in thirty seconds. Nuclear tonight that would ever Bob Muller has found. He could hand off his report soon Donald Trump saying this afternoon. His new G will decide what happens to any Muller reported. Journalists have been tracking the clues that Muller's grand jury could be winding down news coming as the DOJ announces a replacement for molars old boss this week rod Rosenstein, he says he'll leave DOJ entirely by next month. And that matters because he suggested me report would be filed before he rod Rosenstein departs. No one knows what Muller will find or release. But we do know the rules that govern Muller say that he must quote, explain all of his prosecution or declaration decisions prosecution part is simple because we already know who Muller's prosecuted in public declaration that means people that he did investigate but chose not to prosecute. And so that obviously has many people asking well how could that apply to a present? No prosecutor has ever tried to indict a sitting US president making that scenario more familiar as fiction than his news like when twenty four showed a fictional secret service arresting the fictional president. They were once protecting. Clark restless manning, get them. I l on sorry, Mr President cake. Take your water me not anymore, not anymore, depending on what area you're in that might be more or less exciting. But why legally is considering that more fantasy than reality? Well, as everyone waits the Miller report tonight, it is worth getting into the answer. The constitution does not say this explicitly, but many scholars believe it's the jest against indicting a sitting president, and the DOJ has reinforced that view by also formerly advising against it. And that doesn't mean it's legally impossible. But it does set the bar basically about as high as it gets without formally banning the indictment of a sitting president. So here both reasons the founding fathers did consider the idea of presidential crimes, of course. And they created a way for the congress to remove the president from office for high crimes or misdemeanors. Now, there's wide debate over what is a high crime, but the constitution's core remedy there is of course, congress not the prosecutors and the president's. Own executive branch to deal with any such alleged high-crime, and then potentially remove a president over it does that mean people are immune from prosecution because they serve as president. No. And this is important. The theory is about the order of operations not that these people because they're president or above the law forever. But it holds it a president would I have to be removed from office, and then charge later considered the debate from the time of the founding, George Mason who didn't actually sign the constitution argued that the president pardoned power was too broad saying the president ought not to have the power of pardoning because he may frequently pardon crimes which were advised. Yes by himself. But James Madison rejected that saying look there's the security of the house which can impeach him. And here's what I'm showing you that ancient history tonight as everyone waits for Muller to do something the exchange does suggest that the founders when they presume there could be a crime committing president. They also presumed the first response was impeachment to that. So. So it may sound unjust to have presidents who would face. No prosecution for crimes will an office. You can think about the examples that support this theory, take a hypothetical a president trespasses on someone's private property. Really? Did it busted on video, no doubt? And that's a state misdemeanor and under the law. A local prosecutor could try to indict on that offense and convicted trespassing could spend months in jail in DC. But no legal scholars really think the constitution supports that outcome. They argue the impeachment power requires high crimes for that very reason. And that it congress would never find trespassing in DC to be a high crime. Then there's the second reason that it is hard to consider indicting a sitting president. You've probably heard a lot about this one that the DOJ recommends against it. Sitting president cannot be charged with a crime, the prevailing rule is that a sitting president cannot be indicted, the president cannot be indicted. Well, a sitting president because that would materially affect his ability to run the executive branch this view that you hear on the news is become so commonplace. It works as a punchline about why Trump acts like he's above the law. So rudy. Did you go through his like twenty times? Yeah. Jewelry. I told them that you are openly colluding with Russia. But then I ended with. Fine. Thanks. Are you in confessed to some crimes didn't do? And then I said, what are you going to do breath further idea again idea goes well beyond skits that's SNL Rudy, but Trump's own real lawyers like real Rudy. They don't just say that he's innocent. They also make this more suspicious sounding argument that even if he were guilty to DOJ doesn't have the right to indict under the rules. And they note that a dining president would unduly interfere with his constitutionally assigned duties, and that regardless of guilt indictment alone would handicapper presidency taking an overwhelming degree of preoccupation away from the president. Now, the DOJ's official guidance says that this immunity that we're discussing would not preclude prosecution once the president's term is over or or he's otherwise removed. That is something that could scare any president who thinks or knows they committed a crime. Now, another Trump lawyer made headlines for reportedly telling Trump that lying Muller could land him in an orange. Jumpsuit now, we don't know whether Bob Muller's report when it comes out will allege the Donald Trump lied in his written answers, for example. But that was Trump's own lawyer with the view that sooner or later, you could go to jail for. So there you have it the two reasons a sitting president is unlikely to be indicted you have impeachment, and you have the DOJ recommending against it. But what if you had an emergency or a high crime or some reason the DOJ wanted to go forward on indicting president to former special counsel had actually argued that indicting president on the job is not always off the table. The Watergate prosecutor Leon or ski argued in a memo that there was nothing in the language of the constitution. Barring the indictment of a sitting president. And then you get into modern times, Ken Starr was famously the Republican special counsel investigating Clinton. And when I asked him, he took the same view. Use elicited opinion for your investigation that argued a sitting president could be indicted. Did you agree with that view? Then. Yes, do you agree with that view now? Yes. Those are major prosecutorial opinions. Now, we should note neither of them. Actually, did the thing they say they could have done legally they say they had that power. But or they think that power should exist. But they didn't indict a president, as you know, now, then you have DOJ guidelines and a debate over what they mean, they're not law and the man who actually wrote the ones where the special counsel said this. The regulations say Muller, you're bound by DOJ policy, but you can seek exceptions. And so that's what I expect. He would do. And that is why all of the back story in the legal history matters tonight. We don't know what Muller's going to do. But if according to the man who wrote his rules, he uncovered the kind of crime that was so significant that he needed or thought there was a public interest requirement to indicted sitting president he could ask for an exception. But he would have to do that. He would have to do that request by submitting it to the current new attorney general, and we know the judges are no stranger to keeping presidents in line. They ultimately ordered Nixon to turn over those very damning Watergate tapes, they said the president didn't have a kind of limitless executive privilege to withhold the information. Anonymous decision. Eight zero Justice Rehnquist took no part in the decision. Ordering the president of the United States to turn over the tapes that was one of those moments in Watergate to change history. We don't know yet whether anything in the Miller report will push towards one of those moments. Now, the reason why we look at the law, and the constitution and mentioned tonight that there is a very high bar to ever go that far against the president is because it is the law and not our opinions about any given president that matters. I wanted to share that with you, and I'm gonna come back with a special guest to break all of this down. Breaking news in our our. I've just been handed a new Washington Post reports story breaking on the Muller. Endgame Justice department, preparing for Mullah report, the post puts the time line at quote, the coming days, a significant advancement of story, we've been covering all evening, and I want to turn to to experts who follow the pro Ballade for us Jason Johnson from the root dot com and a professor political science and former federal prosecutor, John Flannery. We've just got this from the Washington Post it echoes some of the reporting we had the top of our hour. But does advance at John they put the number of days, you could say who knows? But they also have interesting details. One the post reported tonight moments ago that Trump's inner circle has quote palpable concern that there could be damaging material in the Miller report. That's not technically illegal, but is quote damaging to him. And to reports that people who are on Muller's team top. Prosecutors have reportedly begun talking to old bosses about future jobs when. They leave this office and office known to avoid leaks. But that's a conversation that sooner or later, people would have your reaction, John. Well, my reaction is when the White House is saying that these are technical crimes that we shouldn't give it much weight fact that they're concerned is probably encouraging to those of us who think that what we know publicly so -rageous and an of criminal conduct misconduct and abuses of power that we would hope that the report says something like that and perhaps does consider a recommendation of indictment because how political impeachment would be. And I am concerned that bar who was handpicked by the president may muzzle. Whatever is prepared in the days ahead. So I think these are pretty serious concerns and how the White House performs under this pressure. We'll tell us what kind of crisis and government. We have Jason as a student of Washington. This is starting to feel like something is coming. Yes. This winter. Is coming the law is coming molars coming. However, you put it this is the end game. Everybody's been waiting for it. And and look I understand that Muller is a political. He just has a job to do. But I always thought that the results of the twenty eight election would determine how quickly we got this report between Democrats being in a position where they can do more investigations in the house, and the fact that you now have Bob Barr who's made it abundantly clear through numerous and sundry statements that he would try to do whatever he could to protect the president and that he questioned Muller's investigation. I'm not surprised they're trying to put this out quickly. They need to strike while the iron heart. If they want to have any chance of investigating or statewide investigations, some of the things in the report, Jon if this reporting from the Washington Post tonight is correct. And it echoes the other evidence I already presented. How do you interpret the inference that this report and probe would be concluding without an in person interview with the president who is so central to many of the alleged and confessed crime. Under discussion. Well, the hypothetical that you would test here is were the answers. He gave contradicted by the evidence that was collected by the special counsel. In other words, did he say one thing about the June ninth meeting that they can contradict or about the cover up of the June meeting on behalf of Don jR, and the fact that some people weren't cold that follows a pattern example, Roger stone that the person who was targeted in the end dieted and so forth wasn't necessarily spoken to by the special counsel. So I think I think this is going to be significant we can guess about it. But the I've always thought that this was a three part story in the first two parts were how they set up the system that the incumbent in the Oval Office used to get elected improperly illegally corruptly and what he's done since. He's been in office has been to obstruct the investigation at every turn. I don't see how those two subjects. Don't get. Cust and past presidents who found themselves in trouble there cartoons and satires about it. They found that the cover up was always worse than the underlying crime in terms of the direct evidence. They had to prove what they had done corruptly illegally so forth. And Jason what is the environment in the house? When we talk about the Mola report under the rules. It's only confidential, but what what's been intimated? And what the post is is signaling without directly reporting night is that there seems to be a joint plan to get something that would be going to the congress and unclassified version it goes the public how will the house take this? It'll be huge you will have every single democrat and every single state that Trump is ever done a business in investigating this document to see what they can give local state. Prosecutors this is absolutely huge. And are always we were talking about before this larger idea of whether or not the president can be indicted because that's really the next step after whatever or this gets released. That's why he wanted Gorsuch. That's why he wanted cabinet because clearly people. In the Trump administration believe that you know, they've been lying all along. They, hey, the president can never get arrested for nothing domestic we don't have anything to worry about. But if they weren't worried about that they wouldn't have been so obsessed with putting somebody like Brett Cavanaugh on the bench. So I think the Muller will make at least one suggestion for some crimes being worthy of indictment. The Democrats in the house will argue for that. And then this is going to be huge legal battle that could run all the way to twenty twenty. Well, when you refer both of you to what the Democrats have said about obstruction. There are many prominent Democrats, including chairs, a key committees who were of the view that the president has affectively obstructed and witness tampered in public. So they're already on the record on that the ending in. The Miller report is at the minimum public inflection point for something that as we reported earlier tonight has traditionally been dealt with with regard to the president's conduct in the house. I not in a grand jury John and Jason thanks to both of you on the breaking story. Thanks, right. Straight ahead. We have a lot more. My original fact, check report on why Donald Trump's emergency is based on falsehoods that you should know the details about. There are all kinds of arguments against the national emergency that Donald Trump declared believe it or not just less than a week ago. But before you get to any of the legal ones or the rhetorical ones. What about the entire stated rationale for emergency powers the claim from Trump and his allies that rising immigration to the southern border has reached crisis levels. It is not true at all. And you hear it a lot. There is a growing humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border crisis. At our southern border is growing more serious every day. We see what happens when we have a large influx of people on the southern border. Unaccompanied children are pouring or trying to come through the border in ways that we've never seen in the last month just returned to the highest levels of illegal immigration across our southern border. That is false and not in a minor. Or nuanced way. It is what we fact checkers. Call super false immigration at the southern border isn't an all time heights near an all time low, and it's actually worth mastering these facts as America begins a very long Trumpy debate over his wall money look at the federal data here from passive ministrations all the way up to the Trump administration under a million people were basically caught crossing the Mexico border in one thousand nine hundred figure that grew in the eighties spiking in eighty six over the next decade. Nineties, you can see some fluctuation in a trend upwards. This shows the recent peak for immigration, which is not now or twenty sixteen when Trump ran it's almost two decades ago because then as you go towards two thousand you have this decline dropping lower than even those eighties levels. And then here is the current era from twenty ten until today some of the lowest numbers on record, including 2017, which was these single lowest Mexican migration since nineteen eighty with a small uptick last year, far below all the other toll bars, you see on the left, so regardless of ideology, or whether you like the idea, the president seizing money that congress didn't authorize for a wall or for school, lunches, or solar panels. Whatever you think of that part of the debate these facts are not a debate. These are the facts about declining immigration from Mexico into the US and from the border to the streets to the beltway. We have to keep it real. Even if other people are fronting as. The great Sean Carter once wrote my name is just the facts while the rest of y'all just adjust the facts put words together just to match I say, what's real y'all adjust to that. So just the facts tonight. Here's another one you need to know America now sends Mexico more people than they send to us. So over a five year stretch, you can see right here about eight hundred thousand Mexican citizens came here and a larger number million Mexicans who were in the US. We're going back to Mexico. This is what is called net negative migration or another simple way to look at it as you can see the red arrow is eight hundred thousand Mexican immigrants that have come over to the US over several years with the green arrow is the larger number a higher number of people returning to Mexico. That is another fact that shows immigration is just simply as a matter of facts history in decline right now. And that is at odds with Donald Trump's long running false claims about immigration to justify a wall. Was pledged on the basis of another false claim that Mexico would fund a wall a Walker so laughable Trump himself used it as a punchline when he hosted SNL as a new candidate in two thousand sixteen the proof. Trump knew he was lying and was in on the con- he milked this idea that a pledge would ever be paid by Mexico. He milked it as a joke. Mr President, the president of Mexico is here to see. Well, that's great sentiment. Oh, donald. Oh, Henry k I brought you the check for the wall. So. Very funny. The real joke, though is serious the joke that Trump played with anyone who believed that his supporters, and then he played a joke on himself by setting such high expectations. He could never fulfill them even when he controlled the congress with his Republican party and boxing himself into an unfunded corner. A wall that he can't pay for that. Which now requires new falsehoods about immigration, which is actually declining which brings us full circle back to a Jay Z dichotomy the choice between a just the facts or just the facts when you're given that choice in the Trump era. I'm telling you every time the best thing is to stick to just the facts. I wanted to share those facts with you. And when we come back as promised and announcement on Andy McCabe next. The big news this week. Are the reports include that Bob Muller may be wrapping up his pro which makes it a fitting time to talk to a former acting FBI director who helped launched a probe Andrew McCabe. He will be my guest on the beat tomorrow. We're going to talk the law. We're gonna talk Russia. We're gonna talk the Muller probe as well. As all kinds of about him. Call me in two thousand sixteen I promise you it will be a real interview nothing off limits on the beat tomorrow. Six PM eastern that does it for us. Hi, it's Stephanie rule. If you love MSNBC where your heart on your sleeve gear up t shirts. Hoodies hats and more from Belgian rule and all of your favorite MSNBC shows at MSNBC store dot com.

President Trump president Bob Muller Trump prosecutor Muller Donald Trump Russia Miller John attorney DOJ Andy McCabe Trump Muller United States Trump FBI Trump Tower vice president Eric Trump
A Guide to the Democratic Debates

The Daily

23:43 min | 1 year ago

A Guide to the Democratic Debates

"From the New York Times. I'm Michael Barr. This is the daily. Today. Over the next two days. Twenty democratic candidates for president will take the stage for the first time in the twenty twenty campaign. My colleague, Alex burns on the two competing visions for America, they'll be fighting this week and throughout deduction. It's Wednesday, June twenty sixth. Alex, you've been thinking a lot about the democratic field ahead of these debates. Tell me exactly what you've been thinking about, you know, there's one moment over the last few weeks, that has really stuck in my mind last week at a fundraiser with a bunch of wealthy donors in New York. Joe Biden told the story about having worked with segregationist senators in the Senate really blew up in the race. Speaking at a fundraiser in New York City, Tuesday night, Biden told the crowd. This high was in a caucus with James o Eastland. He never called me. Boy, he always called me son. Herman Talmadge one of the neatest guys I ever knew. Well, guess what? It least there was some civility, we got things done. We didn't agree on much of anything but we got things done. He took all kinds of heat from his rivals, like Cory Booker, I heard from many, many African Americans who found the comments hurtful, and Kamala Harris, coddle, the reputations of segregationists of people who, if they had their way, I would literally not be standing. Here's a member of the United States Senate is I think it's just it's misinformed and it's wrong for having sort of spoken with nostalgia about the old days of the Senate, and the racial implications of that. But when I read the accounts of that fundraiser, a different moment really stood out to me that I would have expected to blow up a little bit more. There is a direct quote in his riff that night where he told this room of donors, that under his presidency no-one standard of living, will change nothing would fundamentally change, you can fix the economy without demonizing, the rich without doing too much to disrupt the lives of the rich that seemed like a really stark statement in the context of this democratic primary, and what specifically about that remark stood out to you. It stood out to me as such an important organizing statement of the Biden candidacy. This idea that you can do what needs to be done without blowing up the system, without taking a hatchet to the economic structure of the country, we tend to think about the divisions within the Democratic Party, the divisions. We're going to see play out on the debate stages this week and next month as ideological isn't being about the left versus the center, but in so many ways, it's about something even more basic, which is, whether you think the system can be made to work in more or less. Form it currently exists, or whether you need to blow it, and in that moment, Joe Biden said you work within the system. I'm not gonna blow it out. So this way of thinking about it. Alex kinda feels like a do over of two thousand sixteen. So are you saying that this is just kind of a repeat of that democratic primary in some ways, you know, last time, the Democrats, had this really stark choice in their primary Republicans had a stark choice in mayors between 'institutionalised, moderate candidates like Hillary Clinton broad-based inclusive growth, is what we need an America, and Jeb Bush, on the Republican side. There's not a reason in the world while we cannot grow at a rate of four percent of year and candidates, who wanted to really swing an axe at the system, congress does not regulate Wall Street, Wall Street regulates congress. A great. Reese Anders in the Democratic Party. And of course, Donald Trump for the Republican, the economy is rigged, the banking system is rigged. There's a lot of things that are rigged in this world of ours. The Republicans chose their pitch for candidate Democrats did not and what we saw in the general election was that there was enough of a constituency that was angry enough disaffected enough frustrated enough with the system as it currently exists that the pitchfork guy, one. Right. There's a lot of speculation right afterward that maybe Bernie Sanders, the democratic pitchfork candidate would have been a stronger nominee. Once it became clear how much frustration and grievance and blow up the system had driven the general election, even Democrats who continue to believe today that Bernie Sanders would have been a weak candidate against Donald Trump who don't support him in the current primary in retrospect, looking at thousand sixteen feel an enormous sense of remorse or frustration that Hillary Clinton was not able to speak to that voter anger, and that the party put. A candidate who was so intimately tied to the current political system in the Washington establishment. So now the Democrats have to decide once again, which type of these candidates to run knowing that, why wouldn't they just go with a Bernie Sanders type or literally with Sanders this time will they may? Well, go with Bernie Sanders or Bernie Sanders type of candidate, but the pool of voters that's available to Democrats in general election is not the same as it was in two thousand sixteen for those working class. White voters is specially in the mid west who voted democratic historically, and turned to President Trump in two thousand sixteen many of them don't have a reason to get off the Trump train just yet the president has spoken to their anger about trade anger about immigration and economic dislocation, their racial anxieties, all manner of frustrations and grievances. When you talk to voters in that part of the country who supported President Trump, you will often hear that they may or may not like. All the specifics of his record in government, but they still believe he's an outside or they still believe he's fighting for them. It's not uniformly true. But that pool of voters that may have been open to Bernie Sanders type candidate in two thousand sixteen may or may not be available to a left-wing pitchfork candidate next year. They may be firmly entrenched with President Trump. That's right. On the other hand, there are big chunks of the electorate that used to vote reliably Republican educated suburban voters, especially more educated and affluent women who would've voted reliably Republican in every previous election and who rejected Hillary Clinton as an option who now seem to be up for grabs on the other side. So we're looking at a different set of voters that is disaffected frustrated with the way Washington is working upset with the president and really undecided about what they'll do in two thousand twenty so it's the same question that we were asking in two thousand sixteen. It's just that the country the electorate has. Changed in the two years since and those frustrated voters who will decide the election this time they are different. They are and Democrats are at a crossroads right now. And they have to decide whether the right way to speak to those voters is to talk about restoring normalcy and stability and getting rid of President Trump and bringing back some semblance of the government that we all know in love or whether they feel like they need to talk to those voters, and really the whole electorate about systemic change and draining the swamp and fundamentally restructuring the way government and the economy, work in other words was Donald Trump, the problem or was the system that got him elected the problem. That's right. If you go candidate by candidate in this democratic field and put them through exactly the question you just asked. That's where you start to separate out the folks who believe that fundamentally Trump as an individual as a leader is an anomaly, and that once you get rid of him the country. Can get pretty quickly to solving its problems within the parameters of the system that currently exists versus the candidates who see Trump as merely a symptom of much more profound problems that must be dealt with in much more drastic ways. And if you believe the ladder, that the system must be disrupted than the Democrats need, essentially a Muir image of Trump. A progressive figure who represents blowing up the system if you believe the former than you're looking for essentially the inverse of Trump, a moderate conciliatory figure, who represents the party's values but doesn't want such difficult change your essentially looking for Joe Biden in that case. Right. A moderate incremental est candidate who is not going to pretend that he wants to take a chainsaw to Washington. He is a guy who knows Washington and actually likes Washington and things that if you just sent him into a room with the Republicans he would get better results than if you elected a democratic president. Who would rail against the congress against the Senate and rail against Wall Street. He's on one poll of the race on the other pole and arrayed in the spectrum between them or a number of candidates, who don't really share anything with Donald Trump in terms of their policies, or their cultural worldview, or their personal manner. But in terms of their attitude towards Washington, and what the next president needs to do to the government to the economy, have a lot more in common with Donald Trump than they have in common with Joe Biden, or Hillary Clinton. We need fundamental change. We need a political revolution government, systematically, favors the rich over the poor, the donor class over the working class, the well-connected over the disconnected things are changing tectonically in our country. And we can't just keep doing what we've been doing. We can't nibble around the edges of a system that no longer works. And so perhaps whereas before we might have thought that the difference between Joe Biden, and Elizabeth Warren. In was not all that significant now with this way of looking at it that difference is pretty significant Biden's agenda, so far is the agenda that he could have run on for president in two thousand sixteen. I know I'm called impress Joe moesha little class. Well, I'll tell you what with a growing middle class. We have that canonic political and, and social stability. It sounds like somebody who's talking about completing the unfinished business of the Obama administration pushing the climate change policies of that White House even further. We need to be investing in clean, energy, innovation, Boolean, clean energy, for structure, for nationwide network of charging stations all across America, implementing a comprehensive immigration reform deal, expanding health care through a version of a public option, but not discarding the private health insurance system in pyroli, you all should have a choice to be able to buy into of public option plan for Medicare your choice. Sure, is companies and doing the right thing by should have another choice. His theory of the case is that if Joe Biden had run on that platform three years ago, he would have beaten Donald Trump because he's a better candidate than Hillary Clinton, and he would have been more empathetic and spoken more directly to the group of voters who felt so disaffected, what I want to see us do big structural change. Elizabeth Warren goes from event to event talking about Kerr, exact words are big structural change. Big strapping, structural change. It's the exact opposite of Joe Biden's message and it's an entirely different bet on what the electorate might respond to. It's not trying to reassure people that everything will be okay. Again, once Donald Trump is gone, it's talking about a much much bigger disruption owner. If you can give us specific examples of how similar ideologies here are totally different. When we think about the approach, you have an idea like Warren's wealth tax, right? Enacts all assets over fifty million dollars held by private individuals. It's this is the ultra rich you're going to have to pay two percent a year of that amount over fifty million dollars that isn't just an incremental. Revenue raiser is designed to go at big fortunes and restrain them. Right. Someone like people to judge is probably somewhat more moderate overall than a war on her certainly than a Sanders. But he is out there campaigning on the idea of adding six justices to the supreme court and changing the procedure by, which people are seated on the supreme court in the first place, a lot of people might assume that it's in the constitution, for example, that we have nine justices. It's not number Justice. There's over the six and ten I think there are reforms that we could undertake. That would make the supreme court less of apocalyptic ideological battle every time that there's a nomination that goes, well beyond differences. Between liberals and moderates and goes at the larger question of big durable political reform. So Alex, given that what are we to make of these recent admittedly early, but pretty consistent polls that have shown these democratic candidates running head to head against Donald Trump. And in those polls, Joe Biden has been the clear favourite. He's come out well ahead of Trump. So what does that tell us does it tell us that voters think that Trump is the problem rather than the system being the problem? It's certainly tells us that a lot of voters find Joe Biden to be a reassuring figure, and somebody who they would prefer to have as president than the current guy that someone like Joe Biden doesn't necessarily need to be out there promising to overhaul Washington from top to bottom in order for a lot of Americans to see him as someone they would much prefer to have in the Oval Office. Whether they see Joe Biden's. Policy vision. Whether they see his vision for how he would operate as president as genuinely inspiring is something that we will find out over the course of a long campaign. What makes democratic strategists feel good about Joe Biden is just the sense that he's a safe option that the entire country, can pretty much embrace an alternative to the president. And what makes democratic strategists and activists anxious about Joe Biden is this concern that Hillary Clinton look pretty safe to at this point in two thousand seventeen and got less, and less safe along the way. That's right. We'll do I pack. The daily supported by hot wire. When I go in vacation, I hate having to choose between getting a nice hotel, but then skimping on experiences. Well with hot wire, I don't have to choose hot wire is travel site that hides the hotel name to help you get more for less. You'll still know the neighborhood star ratings in customer reviews, you can book with confidence score. Four-star hotel at two star prices at H. O. T. W. I. R E hot wire dot com. All bookings final. Hi, this is Maggie Haberman. I'm a White House correspondent for the New York Times. And I'm one of the hosts of the weekly a new TV show from the New York Times in this week's episode. We're focusing on President Trump's inauguration, which people might not realize was the most expensive in history, even Anthony Scaramucci, who was President Trump's communications director for eleven days was left holding his nose over some of what took place. This is not a swamp. Actually, it's a, it's a gold plated hot tub would no drink. But they give you the two bottles of champagne they give you the coupon owes you sit in there with them and they love you. You love them. And they subvert the interest of the American people. There was a lot of money going into this some people were giving as much as a million dollars a piece, and you have to wonder what they thought they were getting that candlelight dinner, you have to pay a quarter of a million to a million dollars a quarter of a million to a million dollars. Okay. And what do you get for that? Watch this week's episode of the weekly on FX this Sunday in streaming the following day on Hulu. To out when are you going to be looking for in the debates over the next couple of days in relation to all of this will looking at the debate through this lens? I think we're going to be watching most of the candidates beside the Joe Biden, for signs that they can break through with a vision of what Washington and what the country would look like after four eight years of them as president and just how different it would be from today. I think most democratic primary voters know what Bernie Sanders wants to do as president, many of them know it, Elizabeth, Warren would want to do as president. There is a range of other reformist outsider. I wouldn't quite say, pitchfork candidates, but definitely candidates who are running against the system who have not necessarily articulated, their vision in really clear terms for a national audience. So does it people to judge on the debate stage have an opportunity to present himself as a, an anti-trump in a substantive way? They get some of his big ideas out there. You know, for a smaller number of candidates candidates who are kind of in the Biden, mold and Amy klobuchar a Michael Bennett, a John Hickenlooper is there a chance in these debates to make the case for yourself has and 'incrementalist responsible figure of stability, where you're not just totally operating in Joe Biden shadow. And then, of course, for Biden himself. This debate is a really important test of whether he can lay out a vision for the country that democratic primary voters here and think that's the country. I wanna live in so far. His candidacy has been to paraphrase, Joe Biden himself return is clear. John Trump is shredded, what we most believe troop makes choices. Trump is tearing down the guardrails of democracy announ of herb, and Donald Trump. Right, that he has talked about himself as the electable guy who can beat the president next fall and for a lot of democratic voters that. That has been enough, but once he's on stage with a big group of people who have big ideas and big personalities and who are fundamentally likable to democratic primary voters, Joe Biden's going to need to show that he can paint a picture that inspires his party's base, and how exactly what we know what we're seeing in these two debates. What would you hear from Biden and from the other candidates on that stage on those stages because there will be to that would be important? He look what particular words, do you imagine listening for well for the candidates who are running as real change agents as real disruptors. I would listen for language about it being insufficient just to defeat Donald Trump. I would listen for language about needing to fundamentally change Washington or fundamentally change the economy. I would be surprised if we didn't hear quite a bit of that certainly from Warren Buddha. Judge about Aurora Cory Booker. Those are the candidate. Dates who have been out there the most in terms of using that vocabulary on the other side of the race. I would listen for certainly Biden himself, and then a number of other like-minded candidates to use language about restoring American leadership, restoring American values at home and abroad, where you're talking about a vision for the next presidency that is less about restructuring the country than cleaning up a mess that they see President Trump is having created. Alex. Thank you very much. Thank you. The Democratic Party will hold its first presidential primary debate tonight at nine pm, featuring ten candidates, including senators Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, and Amy Clova chalk a second debate featuring ten more democratic candidates will be held on Thursday night, including former Vice President Joseph, Biden, Senator Bernie Sanders and Senator Kamla Harris. Right back. The democratic presidential candidates have been out on the campaign trail, but tonight and tomorrow they're going to share the stage in battle it out for the first time all eyes are on Miami, as NBC news hosts the first critic presidential debates a defining event you won't want to miss as it will reshape the campaign watch on. NBC MSNBC Telemundo. Tonight tomorrow at nine pm eastern and continue to follow the latest on the candidates by downloading the NBC news app. Here's what else you need tentative, former special counsel, Robert who has resisted commenting on his investigation will publicly testify before to congressional committees next month. His testimony before the House Judiciary and intelligence convinced could reshape the debate over at the possibility of impeaching, President Trump Muller, agreed to testify after receiving a subpoena from the two committees and. Hometime on. I'm Pat him. Come Chee on record, which was asked model, Ron everything. On Tuesday in a speech from Tehran. Iran's leader Hassan Ruhani to nnounced, President Trump as quote, mentally crippled and called the administration's new sanctions against Iran's leaders outrageous, an idiot. Barrowman tres Aruban room. I'm Barbara, but he CDS. Oh, enjoy your furnace. Oh, in response, President Trump called ruins remarks, quote ignorant and insulting and warned that any future Iranian attack on a US. Target would result in obliteration for Iran. Finding the times reports the acting Commissioner of customs and border protection. John Sanford's will resign after two months in the job amid of growing outcry over the agency's treatment of detained children in the latest controversy for the agents, a group of lawyers documented a lack of showers, clean, clothing, and sufficient food at a Texas patrol station used to house hundreds of migrant children, the agency has denied the poor conditions at the patrol station but acknowledges. It's been overwhelmed by the volume of children showing up at the border. That's I'm like. See tomorrow. This message is presented by IBM. What kind of tech company does the world need today? One that applies smart technologies at scale with purpose and expertise, not just for some, but for all with AI blockchain and quantum technology. We're developing smart scalable technologies that help businesses work better together. Let's expect more from technology. Let's put smart to work. Visit IBM dot com slash smart. To learn more.

President Trump Joe Biden president Senator Bernie Sanders Hillary Clinton Trump Alex burns Democrats Democratic Party United States Senate Biden Elizabeth Warren Washington President Trump Muller America New York Times Washington congress Cory Booker New York City
Blowing this Hoax Wide Open # 948

The Dan Bongino Show

1:00:24 hr | 2 years ago

Blowing this Hoax Wide Open # 948

"Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show. That's not immune to the facts with your host. Dan, Bongino, dbongino show producer Joe. How are you today? Dan is Monday, it's Showtime. So I'm doing good. I'm doing real good there. I am you're you're you're excited to be here. Right. Always. Are you as excited as Robert Smith from the cure member of that band, the QR as excited as he was to be inducted into the rock and Roll Hall of fame? Case you missed it folks here is I love the cure. They were a great band. Here's the cures Robert Smith when asked how excited he is about being -ducted into the rock and Roll Hall of fame. Hi, congratulations that care rock and Roll Hall of fame inductees thousand nineteen are us excited as I am. Sounds of it there. But that is the best seconds of video. You will see a way to kick off the week. I was gonna play that last. And I said to Paula Paula. Let's just throw that one. I I because I really am excited to be here. Thanks Joe for cutting that too. So here's the deal. I did my appearance regularly my Monday morning appearance on FOX and friends, which you all should watch. I do it on the FOX and friends and Saturday morning as well. And this morning, I got the opportunity to kind of tease the segment I'm going to do today on today's show what you're gonna blow your mind about what I've been working on all weekend. How the fix was in from the start Muller knew it was a fixed, and I did a little homework this weekend. And I'm going to blow your mind with an actual timeline. You're going to be able to see the time line. How Muller new the entire time? This was the scam. I know it and we're gonna put a visual up. So for those you listening on the audio worry, it'll all make sense. But if you wanna watch the time line appear Paula was nice enough to pop. Thing for me, a visual timeline, YouTube dot com slash Bongino. You can watch the video of the show as well. All right. Today's show brought to you by buddies at gen you sell my mother in law. My wife everybody uses this product, they love it, my mother-in-law. I don't want to tell you. How old she is? Because she looks like she's like in her thirties. But she uses Genucell stuff is fantastic. Do you wish that double chin would just disappear those bags and puffiness getting a little worse every day? Here's an Email from Robin s from Lubbock, Texas. I put that Joe line Creena my neck about two or three days ago. The best my neck is looked in over twenty years. Several people told me that my face looks young. I am blown away with Jen. You sells natural actives and a pure any oxidant base with no parabens, no chemical sense, and no, pharmaceutical preservatives. It's the clean luxury. Your skin deserves every day two right now in the Genucel Joel on treatment is yours absolutely free. Just for ordering the classic Genucel plant stem cell therapy for bags and puffiness, his do. Text the word young like the opposite of oak because that's how you look to seven seven four five three. Text the word young two seven seven four five three or go to Genucel dot com. That's Genucel dot com. Genucel works for men and women have results in twelve hours. The Genucel immediate effects is also included free. Sometimes after us that for go on the air. What are now get free shipping? Text young two seven seven four five three or go to Genucel dot com. That's jen. You sell dot com. All right. Let's get to. Joe's Monday morning bell. Joe starts off with the bell on Monday off on Friday. Without of course, Sarah are famous Friday closer you all day. So here's good turn that. That's why I love when you start. That's like a couple of months old. And I love every everybody loves that. We got a little signature things here. So folks, I got a little tidbit of information this weekend. I've been working on this show. Oh, we can hear my my notes. And then I have I have a whole book full of notes here chill. I of twenty seventeen is when this thing all hits the fan. Here's the lead. Here's what we're going to go with this. Here's the headline. Here's where I want you to pay really close attention to question. No longer is was there collusion that has been the bunked discredited for those you listen to show breglio. It's old news. It doesn't even collusion's hoax. Only idiots believe in the collusion. Hoax and only morons propagated. A sadly, the Democrats fulfilled the roles and doing them. No one. Believes it. It's not a question of the Trump colluded with the Russians anymore. The question. Now, everybody should be asking is it now that Muller's concluded that there is no collusion that no American on the Trump team colluded matter of fact, they were offered to collude and turned it down the question. I was wended Muller fun this out. And what the hell was Bob Muller doing then for six hundred seventy five days. So the headline is what was Muller up to on this collusion probe. If he knew early that. There was no collusion. How do we know? Bob Muller knew there was no collusion. Paula. Let's get right to throw up your time line there and get if you wanna watch it home, YouTube dot com slash Bongino. Don't worry on the audio podcasts at all makes sense. Elaine out for you. Obviously, you are my primary. Consumer the audio the audio file so dope. That time line. We have of course in early July. This is I have this up. I this is the July twenty seventeen time line. Now, remember folks Muller's appointed in may of two thousand seventeen I'm gonna make the case to you. Now, I think he knew in may when he was appointed collusion was a hoax, but just to be fair to Muller. I'm gonna make the argument that no later than July of twenty seventeen he knows this thing is a total hoax. What is he doing investigating into this month wait throughout that time line back up again? July. It is early July around the twentieth that the F B I produces the Peter stroke, Lisa page tax. Now, I have a question Mark on the visual. They were July because the these texts obviously, people within the FBI know about these texts earlier, and I believe based on Muller's prior ties to the FBI is a strong likelihood he gets wind in early July early July about the existence of these texts. Why does that matter why does this July date twenty 2017 where Muller gets the Peter stroke tax matter because the Peter stroke, text, he's the lead investigator in the Trump case, Joe, he's the one texting is girlfriend. There's no they're they're they're texting his girlfriend Lisa page and FBI lawyer. They're both married, by the way. They're having an affair later admits in sworn testimony Lisa page later later admits that there's a possibility as well. As may when Muller was appointed that there was that. There was nothing there that the. Case was kinda Mira was a dream was a fantasy. They notice he's reading the tax. Now, I have that piece up by Fox, News dot com. Samuel chamberlain. It's an older piece. It shows when exactly the the July twentieth day when the FBI gets wind or produces these these Schroeck Tex he produces them they produce them to the inspector general's office. So right now, they're reading the text about there's no there there. How Trump's supporters smell there? Walmart people. They're reading these texts. We have later probably the texture Mandy McCabe as well. Randy McCabe is talking in October two thousand sixteen about how the DOJ is questioning the reliability their source. What am I telling you? I don't want to rewrite the script here. If you're listening to the show a lot of this is old news. But some of this is going to be very very new, especially a explosive little tier one level. Bombshell. Halfway. This is when everybody is reading the thoughts of stroke in page who are live time texting each other at the time. They were doing the investigation about how there's no there there how they have to have an insurance policy against Trump about how his chances of winning share. He should lose one million to one. Ladies and gentlemen. Bob Muller finds out now that this thing is a hoax, stroke, writes it in the tax Joe he tells his girlfriend that if this was leading to impeachment. We could be part of something big and monumental alit. I if I felt that this would was going to go anywhere. I'd be all over it. But there's no there there. This is the lead investigator in the case, folks Muller knows this whole thing is based on the dossier. If you don't understand point one on the time line, none of the rest of the timelines gonna make sense. Because you remember the lead bring it back out to sixty five thousand feet Muller knows the latest July of twenty seventeen because he gets the techs off their next Muller have July twenty seventh with a question, Mark. That's the reported date. When Muller gets the text July twenty seven we're Muller's notified about the texts. I don't believe this, folks. I think Muller gets the tax a little bit earlier at a minimum gets wind from someone in the FBI. If he doesn't get the tech. Specifically gets wind from somebody in the FBI at this point that there's a real problem. Hey, Bob, I've got news for you. There's a bunch of texts that are about to drop. Here may go public that indicate that the lead investigator investigating Trump doesn't believe this case is real not only that it describes a whole bunch of oak conus lors wars like getting fishing lors overseas to lower people in this is bad. Bob. So instead of Muller in two thousand seventeen July of twenty seventeen doing the right thing. I'm sick of all these people all Muller d-, exonerated, Trump Muller and exonerate Trump. Trump exonerated, Trump Muller should have come out July twenty seventeen and said, hey, folks, this case is a hoax. That's not what he did. Okay. Moving on the next piece in the timeline. Now Muller gets wind of it. Instead of coming out publicly and saying this case is a hoax. What does he do? He dismisses Peter stroke who was on his investigative team is investigative special counsel team. He should he choose me. He dismisses Peter stroke, but he doesn't come out clean publicly. Admit this case is a hoax. It's not what he does. Instead, Paul if you wouldn't mind putting up on the screen. This is what he does. According to a piece by Byron York in the Washington Examiner stroke when he's assigned to the mother probe. This is the FBI again involved in the Hilary Clinton Email investigation across fire. Kane who's now on the special counsel Muller dismisses them, Byron York writes this piece new Justice department pro bass in anti-trump text probe what happened to stroke in pages iphones. This was from December seventeen twenty eighteenth. This is fascinating. Listen to this Horowitz, who's the inspector general told Muller, he thought the situation was serious enough to remove stroke and page, Michael Horowitz is the inspector general who uncovers these texts where they're talking about this whole scheme to take down Trump. It goes on folks, listen to this. This is mind blowing yet it appears that the Muller office stripped pages iphone of all its data without ever checking on its contents. And they stripped strokes iphone after a perfunctory check that may or may not have taken note of the content of its text messages when Horowitz asked for and belatedly received the iphones. He could recover. Nothing from them. Do you believe this tell me again, Muller's wonderful guy? I'm gonna backtrack alive. She's me. I've got a little bit of a cold. But I feel good. Don't worry. We told you. I'd never come on the F. I didn't feel like doing it. I feel fine. Just, but that's what my voice sounds a little different today. Muller finds out from Horowitz about these texts this, text expose the scheme. He then removed stroke doesn't give a public statement about. Hey, folks, this is one big hoax. America should move on. He keeps investigating not only. Does it? Keep investigating he removed stroke from the team because he understands this guy's a political liability. They were issued iphones. He's not there. FBI phones. Okay. I want to be clear on this there. FBI phones are different phones. I think they were Samsung's. That's where these text messages at start this whole thing that are uncovered in early July, folks, you so you're tracking me a recovered from stroke and Lisa page who were signed to the special counsel. Pro briefly are issued iphones those phones after they're fired are white. We don't have the text messages. Can you imagine what those say why would you do that? Why would you do that? Why? Because there's something obviously to hide here. Damn again. What is Muller hiding? He's hiding that. He's investigating a hoax, right? Now, watch what happens afterwards. So Muller clearly understands at this point based on these his exposure to these text messages laying out the scheme that he's investigating a hoax who's part of that hoax. Popadopoulos Manafort, all these people are involved in a collusion hoax story that doesn't exist. It's fake it exists in the mind of Christopher Steele. And the FBI. What happens next July twenty sixth manafort's houses rated? Instead of an apology to America for investigating a hoax and being assigned to investigate a hoax, July twenty six they raid metaphors house. In the early morning. Keep in mind. Manafort is not a great guy. I get it. But Manafort is never ever charged with anything related to collusion with Russians at all. Bingo, Paula has an L A times. Screw here's an LA times. Snapshot August night 2017 where they did a little recap of it. FBI Rada Paul manafort's home demonstrates aggressive pursuit of Russia investigation. If you wouldn't mind putting up a cut from that clip. It makes this is interesting further embedded in their this is from the LA times piece the early morning search conducted by FBI agents working on the case supervised by Muller came on July twenty six listen to this folks, I after Manafort agreed to turn over records to the Senate Judiciary committee, which is also investigating the Trump campaign's possible collusion with Russia. Does that make any sense? Tell me again, I'll Mahler such a great guy. Muller knows the cases a hoax. He has the techs instead of his apology. He goes and raids manafort's house. Joe the day after metaphor degrees to cooperate with the Senate Intel committee, why are you rating house he agreed to cooperate? Listen, I can't say this enough. I'm not defending Manafort, I have no dog in that fight. I don't know Manafort, I just know manafort's the key figure in allegations lobbed against John McCain in two thousand and eight when he runs for president against Hillary, and Barack Obama and the Democrats side these manafort's the key figure in the exact same allegations against McCain that he colluded with the Russians. My guests. Here is Muller needs to show that manafort's a really bad guy. Even though he knows collusion's a hoax because he's reading the tax because he wants to save the reputation of the FBI. So we have to rate his house even after he agrees to cooperate. Folks. This is scary stuff. This is like police they garbage here. All right. The time line goes on again, you can follow along with home YouTube dot com slash Bongino, again in the radio audio program. Excuse me. I'll lay it all out. No worries. What happens the next day instead of an apology for investigating a hoax because he has the tax can't say that enough Muller's reading the tax that extra. They go out and they arrest popadopoulos in a speedy quickey PC arrested the airport, July twenty seventh. The next day George popadopoulos despite his questionable role in this whole scheme. I think popadopoulos is is the key to this whole thing because he set up early was there a Fiso popadopoulos. Oh, what about on Flynn? I'll get to that. You see little tidbit later. It's dead of an apology. They rushed to the airport to pick up George popadopoulos on a PC arrest. Folks. I can't explain enough this PC arresting. I was a federal agent. The overwhelming majority of arrests in the federal government, not in the NYPD or the state police because remember when you're a cop you have to understand the data probable cause arrest without a warrant a police officers on the street, he sees a guy assault and other guy and punched him in the face. There's no warrant folks. You don't call and go judge. I need a warrant. I you just arrest. The guy it's called the probable cause arrest you have witnessed enough probable cause evidence that this guy committed a crime that you are allowed to make that arrest. It's not unusual and local policing. Listen to me, I did both. It is very unusual to make a probable cause. In other words, no warrant arrest in the federal government extr. I've never made one. I made a lot of arrests. So my friends when I was a secret service agent. I have never. Made a PC arrest. The way it works in the federal government. Is you go to an assistant United States attorney with a set of facts, they drop arrest warrant, you swear in front of it before they drop a complaint. The complaint is sworn to in front of a judge may be precise. The judge issues in arrest warrant, you show them the warrior, I'm here for your arrest. You take them in the federal government is different because cases, work in reverse. There. You understand the difference federal agency FBI NYPD are not on street patrol. They don't run this crimes where investigators they investigate crimes. Therefore, the information comes in. I you bring it to a judge, and you swear to it. Now a probable cause arrest in the federal government is not a legal at all. It's it's perfectly legal. It does happen. But it is extremely rare. Why the rush to lock popadopoulos? If Muller already knows the case is a hoax. Maybe to shut down the discovery process. Maybe this shutdown later on popadopoulos going out and telling his version of events maybe to bind up popadopoulos just long enough to shut him up to try to find the digital information. That would prove that this dossier had some meat on its bones. Why would you arrest popadopoulos on a probable cause warrant for making false statements to the FBI, folks? When those false statements were made six months earlier in January popadopoulos, arrested, July. Why would you do that seven months early? This is from the markets work hat tip. Jeff Carlson a PC road June four thousand eighteen lays out a little bullet point of this time line as well. So that up on the screen, if you wouldn't mind, my lovely wife, Paula this is from Jeff across this piece here specifically popadopoulos is arrested on July twenty seventh at Dulles airport at seven p an evening you flew in from eunuch, Germany. He was booked the next day at one forty five AM he was checked out to a federal authority at eight twenty seven on July twenty eight twenty seventeen. Here's the key line. No warrant was issued the entire event appeared to be rushed. What's the rush, folks? What's the rush? The rushes to shut these people down. The rush is the somehow put some meat on a backbone of a broken dossier. That Muller now knows is completely utterly false a total hoax document because he's reading the text of the investigators that no it's a hoax. They're texting each other. There's no there there. These are the lead investigators. What else happens in July? This is our new little tidbit of information and astonishing nugget I happen to fall upon recently. A very bright person. I've been working on with this case for a long time who is. Analysis prized by me in many ways, super smart. Sent me a question I had to do some digging on he said, you know, Dan, wouldn't it be fascinating? If the first contact made by the Muller people and Lieutenant General, Mike Flynn and his family. Was in July of twenty seventeen. Wouldn't that be super special? Now keep in mind, ladies and gentlemen, a couple of things here by July of twenty seventeen. I'm telling you Muller knows it's a hoax. He's reading the text. It's a hoax. Also, Paul if you would mind that Washington Post screen shot of the Mike Flynn investigation. Keep in mind, the FBI, I this point has nothing on Mike Flynn here is an article by the Washington Post. I think it's may have come from that undercover Huber count at John w Huber so hat tip to you. I'm not sure where I got this screen shot. So forgive me. I always try to give credit, but whoever put the red lines up. Nice job. I think it was him. Here's an article by Ellen Nakashima, and Greg Miller, January twenty third 2017 Pala keep that up if you don't mind Joe just to be clear here, July twenty seventeen is after January of two thousand seventeen right? Think about it. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It is. Okay. Thank you very much. I just there are liberals listening who've been facts vaccinated against factors still. We gotta get that out there. Here is an article in January of two thousand seventeen F B I reviewed Flynn's calls with Russian ambassador, but found nothing a listen. Let me read the first paragraph the FBI late December reviewed intercepts of communications between the Russian ambassador. And retired. Lieutenant General Michael Flynn national security advisor to then president elect Donald Trump, but has found no evidence of wrongdoing or elicit ties to the Russian government officials said what the hell is Bob Muller interviewing prosecuting, Mike Flynn four. Why is he reaching out to Mike Flynn in July? Months after this article comes out in the FBI, concluded Flynn. Did nothing wrong. Paula's put the time line up on the screen. They're in mid July. I can confirm that I contact. Now. He already knows. He did nothing wrong. They've already leaked to the Washington Post. Why are they reaching out? Why is their first contact with them in mid July? So now Muller needs to shut down Manafort, he needs to shut down popadopoulos any needs to shutdown Flynn to what to buy them enough time to try to put meat on the bones of the dossier. He knows his fake. What is he doing? Why is anybody celebrating the gross misconduct? A Bob Muller. He serving a search warrant early morning. On that on the house of a guy Manafort who he's never managed to tidy collusion when he knows the collusion allegations in the dossier or a hoax, then they sent her on Manafort Manafort in the dossier. The key player in coordinating, this whole collusion scam that doesn't exist. Why is he going after him? Why is he arresting number two popadopoulos at the airport for a conversation popadopoulos had with the FBI seven months ago. He knows the dossier and everything in it are false. Why is he going after Flynn and requesting documents from Flynn and his family in July when the FBI all ready knows Flint did nothing wrong. What kind of unethical horse is this? Oh muller. He did such thorough. Joe he yeah. As a police state hack, he knew in July at the latest cases, B S. Man. I'm loving this show. So far me to all right. Let me get this in because I'm going to continue. We're not dumb what the July time line. Very cool. I've got a few more points than I wanna move onto something else July. This is the day that it hits the fan. Muller knows it's a hoax and instead of admitting. It's a hoax. He doubles down locking up. Anybody can get as myths on in an effort to thirty of Trump or try to desperately make this dossier look credible. This is a joke. Should celebrate Muller for what police state tyranny gimme a break. Muller? Started tired of hearing it. All right. Today's show brought to you by our buddies. At propercloth, they folks when your clothes fit, well, everything in life seems to go. Well, you don't want those pirates shirts with the wings at the bottom line is with technology. Get close tailored for you. I have proper cloth shirts in my house. Follow how much you love that shirt. They send me is. She does sharp. I got to put a picture up. Eventually. You're more likely to ace that interview that data wherever else you're doing when you have close at make a great impression that are tailored to you. Don't buy clothes tailored for semantic in somewhere proper cloth. Makes it easy. I did. This took me like five minutes or less for men to buy dress shirts that fit perfectly without setting foot in a store or paying a fortune while most bespoke shirts takes months to ship propercloth delivers your custom close in less than two weeks. I got mine even less than that. Go to propercloth dot com. Answer a few short questions and easily. Get the perfect shirt for your body. Thanks to their custom sized prediction technology phychi like a glove Chiku sums up. Propercloth properly, you could get a dresser and have a tailored. But why not buy one made to measure from the comfort of your couch? Plus, they offer a perfect fit guarantee giving you a free may or for a free giving you a free remake of your shirt. If your shirt doesn't fit. Mine was perfect right out of the box right now. Get a load of this. You get twenty dollars off your first custom shirt. He's your beautiful shirts, folks. At propercloth dot com slash, Dan. Go to propercloth dot com slash. Dan for twenty dollars off. Propercloth dot com slash Dan. My shirt is fantastic. I gotta wear them on the show one day. If you think I'm like, oh, you know, there's these shirts are beautiful go. Check them out. Propercloth dot com slash Dan. All right. So moving on Muller knows this whole thing is a hoax as the latest July. Twenty seventeen goes out starts locking people up. His is what else breaks in July twenty seventeen and this is where I think Muller starts to panic. Jim Baker who is Jim commes right hand guy. They're attached to the hip. There's a leak at circa a leak to circuit dot com and article written by Sarah Carter about how Jim Baker is under investigation for potentially criminal leaks to the media. Keep in mind, how significant this happens right around July twenty seven folks again the month this entire civil war over this case breaks out. That case is important because Jim Komi and Jim Baker are like this now clearly Komi and everybody else. Bob Muller knows that the head guy at the FBI legally who's commes right hand guy right there. They're connected at the hip is under investigation for potential criminal leaks. How does Muller and everybody know this because they're reading it in a circuit dot com piece. It's out there in the public domain now which Paul is nice enough to put on the screen. FBI general counsel James Baker purportedly under the parliament of Justice criminal investigation for allegedly leaking classified national security information to the media, according to multiple government officials close to the probe. Now Muller's that are real. I'll bet Muller knows about this leak of couple of weeks prior to Muller. Komi? Everybody starts to panic now instead of again doing the right thing and coming before the American people with a massive may COPA Joe where sorry we screwed up. This case is a hoax. We misled you. They continue to double down. What else happens in July twenty seventeen additional evidence that people who are in the know on this case who've seen classified documents understand? We are looking at the biggest scandal in human history and political history. I don't want to be too hyperbolic, but bigger scandals but in political history, I say that unequivocally. Muller? Does it? Everybody knows it. No apologies though. They doubled down the GOP response CNBC and wrote a piece about it people in the GOP who seen some of the questionable information. Here's a headline from CNBC House Republicans call for a second special counsel to investigate Clinton, Komi and Lynch article July twenty seventh twenty seventeen so same day the leak about you in Baker. I wonder who leaked that people who've seen the documents now are clearly in their own leak war telling people in the media just how bad of a scam. This investigation is. Folks, I need my crowd sources to go out there now and start looking in July of twenty seventeen. July twenty seventeen for key pieces of information that are leaked to the media. Because this is when the latest Muller finds out he is involved in the biggest political hoax in American history. Here's another one that Cohen piece of information put up that timeline on the screen again. So here we go Muller finds out again in July that the thing is a hoax. What happens in July the AP already reported for us. Michael Cohen Trump's lawyer. Keeping my mother knows. He's investigating a hoax. He's not apologizing. No, no, go after metaphor co after popadopoulos go after Flynn, also go after Michael Cohen is the already reported the AP reported in this little nugget of information, which if you don't know the July twenty seventeen date where you should be paying attention. Remember, remember, the names remember the dates records show special counsel zeroed in on Colin early? When exactly did that happen. This was the piece. In mid-july as they all ready have told us. The AP is already put it out there. That this is when Muller zeros and unkown why what are you? Zeroing in uncommon for. You know, the investigation is a hoax. Well, here's the Khuda grod this entire timeline. Why is all this happening? Well Muller clearly at this point after serving a search warrant on Manafort coming up with no collusion arresting popadopoulos coming up with no collusion targeting. Mike Flynn and his family coming up with no collusion targeting. Michael Cohen Trump's lawyer coming up with no collusion now. Absolving Trump of any collusion to this day because he can't find anything Mahler instead of giving up goes back to Rosenstein, Rosenstein and him confer and what happens on August. Second. The revised scope memo is issued. The scope memo, which you can see well, we'll play some of it onto scream the scope memo, which is revised is largely redacted. I'm not going to read to you the whole thing. But the scope memo was this. Here's why the scope memo happens because Muller was charged with investigating collusion. He can't find collusion. He knows. It's a hoax. No apologies though. He doubles down and asked for new responsibilities which rod Rosenstein dutifully complies with and gives him a revised scope memo and August seconds. Why is it redacted? If you look at the scope memo, you'll see huge chunks of it are redacted. Why what's in there? Are components of the dossier which have already been debunked. Is Rosenstein and Muller conferring on Muller's new charge Sigui after obstruction of Justice. Why Justice would have been to absolve Donald Trump of what you now know already know is clear and unequivocal to be a hoax. It's a hoax. You got worked drop the L take the loss. You got worked. I don't know if you miss that. I was trying to be clear, but the new information air about the contact with Mike Flynn and July is just stunning. Yeah. Stunning. You're not gonna hear that anywhere else. When was railroaded? Instead of apologizing to this guy for what they already acknowledged was a nothing burger, I showed you the Washington Post piece. They doubled down. Flint needs to be pardoned stat. This is a disgrace an absolute disgrace to an American patriot who rose up the ranks to being a Lieutenant General who has overwhelmingly positive accolades from everywhere that he was targeted after they knew this was s to do what to cover their tracks. That's what I think happened, folks. This is really really disturbing stuff. All right. I want to get to something next because. There was something brought up on FOX Chris Wallace. A where I I work at FOX, but I have disagreements with both the news people and opinion people. That's one thing. I like about working, by the way, I was ecstatic to be back with judge Janine on Saturday. Hope you all I loved the bag where whereas I guessed right after Rudy so second Gabba Rudy open to show, and I was awesome. So make sure you watch the clip on my Twitter. I put it up. I really enjoyed. It's great to have a judge in e back. I'm a huge supporter lover to death. So it was glad to have her back. But I like working at FOX because when they hire liberals, they hire actual liberals, some people see that as a so I don't I don't get it like they have a new side as well. And they need to get both sides. But when your side is right. You want people to argue on the other side to it makes your argument that much more salient, but I have this agreement with Chris Wallace. Chris Wallace was on with Bill Hemmer. And he said something that I'm sorry. I just don't believe is true at all. All and I want to proceed that the bunk this using evidence. And I'm happy to go on Christmas show and debate. If he'd like Chris said that the investigation, and by the way, Matt Palumbo has a great piece about this. Awesome piece up at Bongino dot com, which will be in the show notes today. Please go to my website and read read this piece, it'll be in the show notes. It'll be up on that com to bunking the myth that the popadopoulos conversation with Downer started this whole investigation. That is a left-wing talking point folks, it is not true. Why are they saying it? It's very simple because everybody knows the dossier is a hoax right now. And the FBI entire investigation was based on what the dossier. So the FBI signal. We didn't base it on this dossier hoax. We based it on popadopoulos Downer's meeting. It's not true. Don't fall for this. I'm gonna the bunk that. When final read for the day and another great company, and we'll knock this out of the park. So I don't want you guys to be falling into this trap. And ladies, it's nonsense. Okay. There's nobody on the planet like you. So why would you buy generic mattress built for everyone else? We have a helixsleep mattress, it's incredible. It's like sleeping on a cloud. Helixsleep built a quiz takes two minutes to complete and they use your answers to match your body type in sleep references to the perfect mattress. Don't get a mattress built for everyone else. Are you aside sleeper a hot sleeper like me? I'm always cooking. And no matter what you like a plush affirm bed with helix. There's no more guessing or confusion. Just go to helixsleep dot com slash, Dan. Take their two minutes sleep quiz, and they'll match you to a mattress it'll give you the best sleep of your life for couples helix can even split the mattress down the middle providing individuals support needs and feel preferences for each side, they have a ten year warranty, and you get to try it out one hundred nights for free. That's how confident they are in this mattress. I told you we have one for my daughter Amelia wrote this great note, which helped bring up later. Sometimes my wife reads her books at night and my wife falls asleep on the helix because she loves it so much right now he looks is offering up to one hundred twenty five dollars off all mattress orders. Get up to one hundred twenty five dollars off it. Helixsleep dot com slash Dan. That's helixsleep dot com slash Dan. For up to one hundred twenty five dollars off your mattress. Order helix. Sleep dot com slash Dan. We love helixsleep check him out. Yeah. Before we get it policy my daughters. The cutest thing ever my youngest daughter. So my wife told her to stop writing on herself with this clear marker. She goes my wife says Amelia, go right on paper. Stop rates a clear, Mark. And she was just like writing on her fingers with it. And if she says that Mimi, we that's our nickname. She said a Mimi you have to clean up your toys in the living room. So my wife leaves, and I go up to the counter my kitchen and get something to drink. And I see this note Polito that up on the screen. This is real isn't that a joke? Sorry, mommy. How am I going to play when I have to clean up? Also, you cannot right on papper. Paper smell rock with dad pen. This kid be priceless. I'm telling you. She is the great. I mean, obviously is my daughter. I love it at that. But how am I going to play when I have to clean up? This is perfectly logical. You can't do two things at the same time. So thereby daughter billion just dropping bombs on his on his wife's like, I can't. I just his Joe's better many times. Right. This can show precocious. It's incredible. It's cool, man. It's cool, man. He's a Cutie law. Right. So getting back this. Yes. Please stop repeating this myth that the popadopoulos Downer meeting in the London bar is what started the FBI investigation. It didn't it is a left wing talking point to get you away from the fact that the discredited dossier was the FBI's entire case. Let's go through the evidence. One by one point number one. If it's popadopoulos is meeting with the Australian embassador is London bar that starts this FBI case where popadopoulos is alleged to have talked about dirt on Hillary, which is not true, by the way down or even Downer. Dismisses that now he says, well, I don't remember him saying that then why was popadopoulos not interview twenty seventeen. Does that make any sense? You have the biggest counterintelligence investigation in American political history based on a tip where you think George popadopoulos is given up the fact that they colluded with the Russians, and you don't even bother to interview him. Remember, he meets with them in may of twenty sixteen popadopoulos meets with Downer. He wasn't even interviewed until January of two thousand seventeen. Folks, I wasn't investigator. I'm not stupid. I've invested. This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Secondly. Why is it that on July thirtieth Nellie or from fusion GPS working for fusion GPS that produce the dossier? And her husband, Bruce at DOJ are meeting with Christopher Steele on July thirtieth Christopher Steele gives them information. His the guy who writes the dossier. Some of it Bruce or then rushes over has a meeting with Andy McCabe, ladies and gentlemen, July thirtieth is a Saturday. Think about what I'm telling you now for you federal agents out there. I got a lot of you. Listen to show, I love you ought to death. I mean, it your emails are great. How common is it for a supervisor like Andy McCabe who at the time is the deputy director of the FBI to be working on a Saturday. The answer. How common is it uncommon? I had bosses you couldn't even find out a weekend. They were in a Beezer. They took uphill in a Bs. And maybe that might composite down eighty two. I've just carrying that take pills that Abe's. It's a joke. It's a song. Sheesh. Some people take me seriously when I'm being joking around. These supervisors do not work on Saturdays. So Andy MacKay brushes in on a Saturday the same day, a Justice department official and his wife who's working for the company produces the dossier meets with the guy who writes the dossier, and yet the dossier had nothing to do with the case that's opened up on a Sunday. Yes. The next day by Peter stroke on a Sunday. But no, no. It was the popadopoulos thing, folks. Do you want to stand out stupid? You have to beat a belief is the guy who writes the dossier meets with the wife of a woman working for the company produces the dossier who mates with the Justice department official who rushes over to the FBI on a weekend. Who opens up a case the next day on a Sunday about the dossier? Gus stop repeating left wing talking points. I mean this defies credulity. I you have to do some basic investigative reporting. Third Maccabees already admitted indie McCabe that they would have had no case without the dossier in a December hearing he made up on the hill, but appearance he made he's already said the case what have existed without the dossier. Fourth FBI agent. Michael gator. This is all in Matt Palumbo piece, by the way on our website upon Gino dot com. The bunking this myth about the popadopoulos meetings. Starting this two weeks before the investigation is opened up July of twenty sixteen July thirty first of two thousand sixteen across far hurricane is opened up. And if agent by the name of Michael Gaito, Lou knows Christopher Steele mates with them in London and exchange information, which is likely in the dossier. My gosh. Fair who is the fi- issued on right after Carter excuse me after July thirty first far hurricane cases open. The FIS is issued on Carter page just months later who is a key figure in what the dossier page in popadopoulos have no significant relationship whatsoever. Finally page in Alber. Crossfire hurricane is opened up. This is the kicker, folks. This is really going to blow your mind. If crossfire hurricane is opened up July thirty first of two thousand sixteen. How is an FBI informant spying on the Trump team Stefan helper? How is he reaching out to Carter page show two weeks before that? Ladies and gentlemen, FBI administrative procedures as clearly laid out in my book spy gate. Clearly, laid out even in a preliminary investigation and investigation would have to be opened up to have used a confidential human source, even if it's only preliminary to investigate someone in a counterintelligence probe. How is that? Folks. If the investigation is an open till July thirty first what was opened before that that two weeks earlier to July thirty first the FBI is using his spy a confidential human source to try to infiltrate the Trump team because how permits with Carter page two weeks early. Tell me again, how popadopoulos did this whole thing. Ladies and gentlemen, I did a show about a year ago where it's now clear there were multiple investigations opened on the Trump team. It's clear as day. All you have to do is open your eyes to see it. By the way, folks. One quick administrative note, I just again, a note of sincere heartfelt. Gratitude all of you who picked up my sequel to spy gate on preorder exonerated the failed. Takedown of Donald Trump by the swamp on Amazon and Barnes and noble. It's available now I'll put the link again in the show notes you had us as low as number twelve on our category number twelve on Amazon out of there. What ten million books? I don't even know you all are the best. And I love you to death. And I mean from the bottom of my heart. We put a ton of work in a book to we're about three fifths of the way done. And it is going to blow your mind when I put it on wait till you see the nuggets in this one. So please pick it up today. I sincerely appreciate it. You guys. You guys are amazing. All right. Here's another thing. I'd so I think we clearly if you're paying attention in investigating this is an investigative journalist. Elsewhere are interested in the facts that that is a the bunk talking point folks, it's not true. It was clearly the dossier. That was the central key tentatively FBI's cases. Popadopoulos interviews garbage even Downer disputes what happened there we had a boozy encounter downers like we had one gin and tonic. Popadopoulos of the dirt on Hillary downers. Like, I don't remember him saying third on Hillary. It's all nonsense, folks. Don't buy it. Now. I want to leave you with a final. Do we have fifteen minutes? Yeah. This may be if not I may get smother stuff, but we'll see I was sent a Texas weekend by a source who I've been working all weekend onto this is one of Andy mccabe's techs, we've recently seen and this is a devastating tax because it opens up an entire ball of wax. The text is an for Mandy McCabe sperm, and it talks about the DA g the deputy attorney general being worried about a Pfizer warn. On a on a on a source, and that's sources access policy. You in mind throw a net that text up. This is a devastating text. And it begs the question here who the heck are they talking about? Who are they talking about in this tax? I'll really t- exactly who is your read on my phone here. Here's the tax in caves inbox. DA g talking about deputy attorney general inquired about our plan re regarding that FIS at target if he mobilizes so we know it's a guy, obviously, given the physical access he has let me know if you got the Email, I forwarded from tash ascendance over I'm gonna I me when if we can put a link to this text in the show, I'm going to send this to my wife now because this would be really cool, Paul. I just sent it to you. I know it'll be up on the screen to. So we on the YouTube channel can read it. Think about that text show in Andy mccabe's in-box, they're expressing concern that the deputy attorney general Sally Yates at the time. Sally Yates, who we know hates Mike Flynn. And we know can't stand Donald Trump either. Trump fires or later. This is also right around the time. That Mike Rogers from the NSA goes up to Trump Tower to brief him. And I I don't I'm not I'm pretty sure some information coming out right now about how deep the scandal is. Who is this Pfizer on there? Talking about why are they worried about physical access? I'm working on a potentially explosive conclusion here, and I believe a lot of the evidence may point to a Pfizer. They had. I'm almost hesitant to say it, but I believe on Mike Flynn. Now, what's the evidence for that? Obviously. Oh that to you do too. Because this text doesn't say Flynn, but they're worried about someone would physical access now Flynn, obviously an insider in the Trump team. Obviously, people know he's going to be the incoming national security adviser people understand that Flynn probably still as access to things given his security clearance. If there's a FIS on Flynn, it would make sense that McCabe and Sally Yates who hates Mike Flynn. Matter of fact, that Sally Yates who goes to the White House and briefs the White House about the danger. Mike Flynn presents because he could be bribed Bri the Russians because they were listening in on his calls, which is absurd. It's just ridiculous. Why do they need him out so badly out of the White House? This text would fit if the Pfizer was on Flynn. And oh, boy if there's a Pfizer on Flynn, ladies and gentlemen, this is going to be a tier one level nuclear blast man member. We only know about the FIS on Carter page. I believe there was a FIS on George popadopoulos. And I believe there was a fire on Flint. Let me give you another piece of evidence. Not just this text because admittedly the correlation there is loose. And I am speculating that that text could be about Flynn. But if you read the Flynn and hat tip to my guy on this. If you read the Flint statement of offense in other words, that charges against Mike Flynn, what Muller's team laid out against Flynn in some of the earlier paragraphs they described conversations in the actions that took place with Flynn after the monitoring of his call with Sergei Kislyak the Russian ambassador. I know it's complicated. Follow me because this is important really important. Joe if the conversation Mike Flynn had with the Russian ambassador that earlier in the show, I showed you the Washington Post said the FBI deemed, nothing, listen, right? But the public record of this case, the Obama administration officials and other people involved seem to believe that that call they heard Mike Flynn talking to the Russian Basler because they had unmasked Flynn while listening in on the Russian ambassador. Not flynn. It's important the difference. Yeah. I understand. You're tracking me Yemen. The official Obama administration stories we were not listening in on Mike Flynn. He's a US citizen. Gotcha. We were doing standard intelligence monitoring a foreign officials in this case Kislyak, the Russian ambassador whose Russian and we just happened to step on Mike Flynn as well. We massed him. And while LA that's how we got his records. Yeah. Right. But if you read the statement of offense, it's puzzling. Because they seem to have records or some. Account of the conversations that had days afterwards between Flint and the transition team now to give you both sides of this. All right. It's my source adequately. Put pointed out, it could be that Flynn just gave them in account of his conversations that's possible because he was cooperating. But ladies and gentlemen, it could very well be as well that they were listening in on Flynn's conversations the whole time. And that's how they got this information. Was there a FIS on Mike Flynn? It's just fascinating that this text occurs after the election when everything's hitting the fan, they're all in a panic because they know they're all going to be discovered, and in McCague's inbox is them worrying about the Sally Yates, the deputy attorney general then worrying about a Pfizer target that had physical access. Remember, the only FIS target. We know about as Carter page what physical access does he have? He's a civilian. I told you today show was going. Was going to drop some Bob's idea. I folks. There's so much more here so much more. I think they are genuinely worried about the discovery process the Muller probe and everyone else the greatest thing Flynn could have done and popadopoulos would have been a go to trial yet why. Because if they went to trial, they would have been privy to discovery material where the government would have produced the evidence against them. I believe this is why Bob Muller came in guns. A blazing charged them with everything they could under the sun threaten their families and everything else to get them to plead early. So they wouldn't go to trial. So there would be no discovery process. And they could bury all of this stuff. Six feet deep. All right. Paula can you cue up that Chris Wallace, Fox News thing with Jodi Himes? I know I said I would play it last after Jay Johnson. But I have just to defend crystal because I think Chris does try to hit both sides. I told you I disagreed with him on the dossier. But Chris Wallace had Adam shifts number two guy democrat, what is the name Jim Himes, or if I forget his first name, but he's a congressman who tries to play a more reasonable, Adam Schiff, but Himes also is a propagator of nonsense Russia collusion hoax ary, and he goes on with Wallace and starts to again, go down this road that collusion exists Despites. It'd be despite it being entirely debunked and Chris Wallace Azima question. Watch Himes getting tireless shut down this great. Joining us from Connecticut. Congressman Jim Himes, the number two democrat on the house intelligence committee. Congressman let's start with what you told your local newspaper and Connecticut this week about whether. The mullahs report clears the president on the issue of collusion with the Russians. Here's what you told them. I'm not sure I'd break out a lot of champagne. They tried to make the case at the Muller report says there's no evidence of collusion. There's plenty of evidence. But congressman and now dragging the counter argument to what I was discussing with Kellyanne. That's not what the mullahs report says it doesn't say there's plenty of evidence of collusion. Now. What the mullet? Well, first of all nobody knows what the mullahs report says because we haven't seen it. We've got the four page bar summary, and even though my Republican friends are attacking Adam Schiff and others by saying that the mullahs report says no evidence that's not at all what it says. If you read the bar letter the bar letter says that the investigation was not able to establish So Chris two things under. No, you say no excuse me, because with all due respect, sir. That's absolutely incorrect. I'm going to put up on the screen because we knew. That this probably was gonna come up the specific quote from attorney general bar. Here's what he says, the special counsel did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with the Russian government and these efforts despite multiple offers from Russian affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign. So specifically the special counsel is not saying there's insufficient evidence to prosecute. He's saying it didn't happen, right? So again, two things are possible at the same time number one, whatever happened, and there's four hundred pages of report that we're going to see so something happened or it wouldn't be four hundred pages long. But whatever happened the conclusion is that it's not a chargeable. Against her at respectfully. He didn't say it's a chargeable offense. He said the report did not find that the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated. Good friend said Chris used guys on that. He's not opinion guy. Like, I am a hat tip the Christian. I put that on the show you how I can disagree with them. And at the same time, give them a big round of applause. Himes doesn't know what to say Himes Fred's is hysterical. Did you catch? Your Joe Himes is the fences will something happen. You know, something something did happen in nineteen eighty six. The Mets won the World Series. Surprising upset against the Red Sox. You know, it in nineteen seventy four December four Dan Bongino was born August second nineteen seventy-five Paulo bungee something happening. Mark Messier was a New York ranger want that happen. What do you mean? Something happened. I will college at queens college that happened. I met Joe Arbor costs that WCBS while running for Senate in Maryland, and we became into the for that happen to to restrain his evidence for proving Russian collusion that's been entirely debunked by report, he's clearly mischaracterizing is we'll hey something happened. You're Joe what I started doing the show in two thousand fifteen to happen. There's nothing to do with Russia collusion either. So good job by while. Is of nail misguide guy is nothing to say, he was respectfully, sir. That's not what the report says you can read this yourself. There's no evidence of collusion. Fact, the Trump team was approached by the Russians was and they said, no, the it's the anti evidence. The evidence is completely counter to what gyms Jim Himes is saying. Now, you see why there's you have to understand folks a lot of you don't underst-. I mean, I'm not giving up any secrets here. There's a news division and an opinion side. That's what he gets paid to talk about facts. And what each has said is a fact that's a factor of report is entitled exonerates him completely of this. Your defense. Can't people something something happens all the time. Hillary ran for president that to happen. This is so weak and pathetic. It's really I have a tough time believing Democrats are still holding out hope on this. All right. That's enough for today show one thing on a personal note. I wanted to bring up today. I know it's been a crazy show. Appreciate everybody's side. I t's the. Yeah. Thank you. But but on a very serious note. I was in the gym last week with a with a friend, obviously mention his name raving about it. But he's an addict is drug problem. And I believe he had a little bit of a relapse in. I just want to say to out there given that a lot of it's in my family to and I said to him, and I tried to look in the eye. And you know, we're with you man, you have a home here in this home. You know, you're I don't mean to sound hyperbolic or like Popeye go, eat your spinach, something my job. But I just want you to know that God loves you. And I love you here too. And I know the struggle your within those chemicals are really hard, but you can beat them. And I told this kid that you gotta hang in there. And you have to get down on a knee and asked to be saved, and you will be no people give a dam, and I say that because it hurt me really because I really liked this kid, and I don't know. Much. I only know him from. But I I spend a couple of hours a week in the gym, and I ran into him. And I've seen this guy struggle. And I saw what he looked like, and it just rips my heart out, and I just wanted him to know, you're not alone. And I want you all out there having a problem with chemical dependency or what to know, you're not alone. You know, I care I read your emails when when I covered this last time, and you sent me your emails, what your struggle, those really of all the emails that hit me. Those hit me the hardest. I've had a problem with this in my own family as well and your loved man people care and just know when you know when you relapse and come back, it hurts other people too. They need you to be strong because they care about you. And that matters. All right. Don't mean to sound pollyannish. But it's important, and you know, show show is not just about current events. It's about real world stuff too. And we really appreciate you tuning in. Hey, thanks a lot folks. You just heard the Dan Bongino show. You can also get Dan's podcasts on I tunes or soundcloud and follow Dan on Twitter twenty four seven at debone. On gino.

Trump Muller FBI Mike Flynn Donald Trump Paula Paula Joe popadopoulos Popadopoulos Manafort Dan Sarah Carter investigator Paul George popadopoulos popadopoulos Downer Washington Post Peter stroke Bob DOJ Andy McCabe
July 24, 2019: Robert Mueller Testifies; Nevada Genetics Study

Here & Now

42:23 min | 1 year ago

July 24, 2019: Robert Mueller Testifies; Nevada Genetics Study

"This message comes from here and now a sponsor indeed. If you're hiring with indeed you can post job in minutes set up screener questions then zero in on your shortlist of qualified candidates using an online dashboard get started at indeed dot com slash N._p._R.. podcast from N._P._R.. W._R.. I'm Robin Young. It's here now. Former special counsel Robert Muller is testifying before Congress. Today he began this morning before the House Judiciary Committee looking at his investigation Asian into Russian interference in the twenty sixteen election and possible obstruction of that investigation by president trump. Here's part of Muller's opening statement over the course of my career. I've seen a number of challenges to our democracy. I see the Russian government effort to interfere in our election is among the most serious as I said on May twenty ninth this deserves. The attention of every American well mother is now speaking before the House Select Committee on intelligence which is taking up Russian interference N._p._R.. Justice correspondent Ryan Lucas joins us now I Ryan and we just briefly some up. <hes> the hearing that just past Democrats did get rubber motor say he did not exonerate the president of obstruction as the president repeatedly claims he did Republicans attacked the entire investigation. What struck you the most well? I think there are a couple of things one is that this went largely according to script we knew that <hes> Muller did not want to discuss at length what was in <hes> what was outside of his report. He wanted to stick to the report itself <hes> and he stuck through to that he did not <hes> get into long long exchanges with with with lawmakers <hes> a lot of it became mono-syllabic yes or no answers <hes> Democrats. I thought <hes> early on in particular did a very good job of getting the sort of answers that they wanted for Muller in the sense of did did your report exonerate. President Trump Muller says no that is a win for Democrats. I think that Republicans spent a lot of time competing with each other to get a good sound bite attacking muller and his investigation <hes> but ultimately bottom line that went largely according to script that whole I hearing well this was into a little of that because the attack the genesis of the investigation they went into what could be weeds for some people. Maybe not for instance for viewers of Fox News because this is very much a conversation sation the how this investigation was started. They brought up the steele dossier for instance. This was the information put together by a former British spy. I commissioned by Republicans to attack then candidate trump then when he became the party's candidate they he dropped it was picked up by Democrats. Here's the Republican Greg Dubya Florida and I'm asking you directly did any members of your team or did you interview Christopher Steele in the course of your investigation. I'm not going to answer that question. Sir You had two years to investigate not not once. Did you consider it where the investigate how unverified document it was paid for by political opponent was used to obtain a warrant to spy on the opposition political campaign. Did you do any investigation that was not accept your characterization what occurred <hes> this happened over and over and over again. Republicans have thought this through what what was their goal here well what we heard in this instance and then with a number of other allegations from from Republicans where the lines that we have heard over turn over four really the past two years and that is a long-running attempt to try to undermine <hes> the Muller investigation in any conclusion that it comes to to get at <hes> kind of race questions about the origins of it <hes> and whether it was is politically motivated <hes> the matter of the steele dossier the fact that it was picked up <hes> and while the fact that it was essentially funded by the Democratic National Committee by the by the Clinton Campaign <hes> and used at a certain point in time as part of the justification to get a surveillance application on a former trump campaign advisor Carter page that has all played into fed into this large Republican narrative <hes> that there are questions about how this investigation was run and allegations that it was essentially an attempt by Democrats to take down <hes> Donald Trump now well so this morning as you say and others are saying Democrats did get more to repeatedly say the president was not cleared of obstruction now we're looking at Russian contacts potential context with the trump campaign <hes> and Russian interference in two thousand sixteen. Some of the analysis were hearing is that this committee an intelligence intelligence. Maybe Democrats on the committee might have more of an eye to twenty twenty in talking about Russian interference. What what's your thoughts here but what we might here? I think that this committee because Democrats want to focus on Russia's interference as opposed to obstruction of justice is going to get it something that Robert Muller <hes> has been more forthcoming about in more eager to talk about in that is what the Russians did to try to undermine U._S.. Democracy in two thousand sixteen in something that he warned about the only other time that he's spoken publicly <hes> over the course while actually sense his investigation began it was actually he spoke in May after he had closed everything but he emphasized then any emphasizing is opening statement today for the House Judiciary Committee that he has a very long career in public service in the U._S. and the challenge of Russia's interference <hes> in the U._S.. Elections in two thousand sixteen the challenge that that poses to this country to the United States is very serious and it's something that every American should care about and <hes> what might the Republicans be asking here because again the topic is supposed to be Russian interference well if the opening statement of the top Republican on the committee Devin Nunes is any indication. We may hear a lot of attacks on the Muller Investigation <hes> <hes> who worked for steps the day took because the newness came out of the gates with guns blazing so more attacking the investigation than the Russians who interfered N._p._R.. Justice correspondent Ryan Lewis Lucas. Thank you my pleasure and assigned story now about genetic screening these popular tests can tell us a lot about ourselves from where we come from to our risk of developing disease in Nevada researchers are collecting this personal information the largest health study of its kind in the World Noah Glick from member station K. U. N. R. Reports. I need up with Jordan staedtler in Reno Coffee Shop. She's a mom to a two year old boy with another kid on the way a girl. She recently got some interesting information about her family. I related to Jesse James the outlaw which I think a lot of people are it's Kinda. It's kind of weird. staedtler discovered this connection after she took part in what's called the healthy Nevada project this statewide initiative ask participants to provide a sample all of their saliva to determine a genetic blueprint in return. They get free ancestry results in genetic health screening. It's how staedtler discovered that in addition to some interesting relatives. She has a genetic disorder called familial hypercholesterolemia or f h CH- basically she has high cholesterol unaffected by Diet and exercise. We're not like dwelling on it or not upset about it like it's just something that I have and we're GONNA fix it. Since getting the results US drastically changed her lifestyle. She's switched to a plant it based Diet and exercise is more regularly now to avoid making her cholesterol level even worse but the real finding for her has to do with something a little more personal staedtler lost her dad about ten years ago the victim of stroke at age forty five. I always say that that we felt like my family was Kinda cursed. 'cause you know they're men who are passing away really young and it's scary. We never really truly new why and this could be why genetics offers a lot to the basic researchers church. That's Dr Joseph Jim Ski. He's the principal investigator for the project and now we're finding that it's really important in Clinical Setting Jim ski says the project started as an idea between the state funded Desert Research Urge Institute and Environmental Research Organization and renown health a Reno based not for profit healthcare network together the two wanted to understand how knowing your genetic information could help improve health by changing your behavior and that to should be is the trillion dollar question. Jim Ski says he hopes this project will increase research infrastructure and funding so his team can answer bigger questions about how genetics and environmental forces interact with each other for now. The study is looking for three gene in variants that are linked to colon cancer high cholesterol and breast and ovarian cancer for the one and a quarter percent of the population that has one of those three conditions. We could do something about it before it's too late the healthy Nevada project that kicked off about three years ago it has around fifty thousand participants now but its aim is to eventually reach one million people across the state. Anyone can sign up which is what makes it the largest community based population health study of its kind in the world but it's a lot out of personal data to have on file. This doesn't get more personal than you are G._N._A.. That's Dr Anthony Slonim the president and C._E._O.. Of Renown health so we have in the project tremendous responsibility in ensuring that we are protecting that with the utmost care to do that the project has added several security layers. Slonim says no one involved in the project has access to both genetic data and personal health information and unlike direct to consumer genetic tests like ancestry dot com participants in the healthy Nevada project protected by certificate of confidentiality from the National Institute of Health that means law enforcement and other entities can't get access to the information slonim hopes this protection encourages more people to get involved in the study man and that means more data. This provides some insights about the issues of our community not today not tomorrow but ten years hence D._N._A.. Sequencing company Helix provides the genetic analysis for the project object co-founder Justin cow says genetic testing has gotten significantly cheaper that means these kinds of tests can be done more. It's just another data layer just like your annual physical just like an annual cholesterol passwords. Another data on your physician will use to help keep you healthier. Cal sees a future where physicians could search digital genetic profile to find the right mix of treatments and medications based on your specific genes participant. Jordan staedtler sees a future with less heartache if it could save a family from going through what we went through then I think it's totally worth it. Even though she misses her dad she says finding out about her condition has given her some closure and motivated other family members to get tested for here and now I'm noah glick and Noah's story comes to us from the mountain West News Bureau. You're listening dear now still looking for a great summary While maybe one you can Peru's while you pick at a lime Jello mold salad with marshmallows and shredded carrots is allie robots jello girls recently out in paperback. Yes the book book is about Jello and girls. You know what makes the little girl happy twinkling jello nothing quite like General Wonderland of delight but Jello was anything but a wonderland for the women alley row bottoms family who inherited the Jello fortune millions and what they said was the Jello curse alleys grandmother her mother and alley all felt forced to be as perfectly molded as a Jello desert she traces the history of Jello. Her uncle bought lot the patent in one thousand nine hundred ninety four hundred fifty dollars. The family sold it years later for sixty seven million her family members suffered alcoholism eating disorders. The town of Leroy New York were Jello was made until until it's suddenly wasn't and women in the kitchen. The cover of her book shows in Orange Jello mold with what looks like a Barbie trapped inside again alley rowbottom terrific book is Jello girls a family history. We spoke last August. I will you begin the book almost at the end you taking care of your mother as she dies from the cancer. That's just tortured her almost her whole life and as she's dying the only thing she can eat is joe which she hated in avoided her whole life tech about the irony there at the end of my mother's life she accepted it but for much of her life she avoided jello seeing it as sort of a symbol of patriarchy on a broad scale but also so of her own families struggle against patriarchal forces and against what they thought of as Ajello curse so at the end of her life when it turned out that Jello was the only thing that she could stomach it. Was this sort of grim irony unfortunately it. They wound up being the the last thing she ever eight. Talk a little bit about Jello because there's a story line here. It's kind of a history of food in America and new domestic science technology. You just put in hot water so simple. Even a child child can do it which of course infers that women home doing this are childlike but talk about how it was sold them in this idea of domestic science well jealous marketing really took hold around the onset of industrial revolution. Many American women were losing a lot of their help in the kitchens to factory work that was more lucrative and probably more rewarding and a lot of senses for people who had previously worked in kitchens of the middle classes so many American women were finding themselves themselves unsure of how to prepare the recipes that they had grown used to eating but Jello came around and sort of had a double hook in that it was so easy to prepare but it was also this new scientific food at an age where America was really privileging science and technology it compelled its audience never mind that it had dies in more sugar than you know and made from what the WHO's of animals now I think it's it's made more from boiled hides in skins but at the time it was rendered from hooves and bone and women were encouraged to do what with it it could be a breakfast but it was also a salad but then it could also be a desert so it was very versatile and it really early malted itself a few well to people's pallets well early on Jello commissioned Norman Rockwell to illustrate cookbooks and advertisements interesting because when your mom is actually committed to an institution there's rumor that Rockwell is there as well and he did. We now know have a lot of mental health issues so your mom was in the only one who couldn't adhere to this perfect image that Jello was presenting to the world but brings to the point that your mother came to that Jello makes women's silent my mother vary overtly felt that Jello and sort of the larger American culture that it served as an icon for did contribute to what she says Patriarchal Culture that contributed attributed to silencing and oppressing women well and talk about your mom and her story which you clear is I'd tell she was molested by friends of her brothers <hes> when she was very young girl lured into having sex with wit sounds on Seca lecherous married cousin then as we said went to the Austin Rigs Mental Hospital at the age of nineteen after that was you know you could say promiscuous in her life that she was trying to craft getting away. Hey from the family in its fortune an artist in your own right. What was it like to write about? It was a really moving experience. Honestly I mean I started this book before she died but it really wasn't until after she died died and I experienced grief and loss that I really understood why she had behaved the way she had for most of her life for example on birthdays and Christmases she would send US presence from her own dead mother there. I always find that strange and now I completely understand it. Will her mother died so young. Yes and I think all of my mother's behaviors could really be traced back to that initial loss and like I said it really wasn't until I lost my own mother that I understood that about her and I could look at her memoir that she left behind with a whole new perspective because she had wanted to write the book that you ended up writing she had she had tried for much of my life to write a memoir of her girlhood and adulthood and to braid in this idea of the curse of Patriarchy and how it connected within her family and how we probably in her mind connected and most women's lives there so many characters in here Jello za character your mom of course you grandma and also the town Roy New York where Jello was king and then when Jello left the town the town was decimated committed but you trace that fall in Roy to another storyline in your book you and your mother worth captivated by a new story that we remember of a group of young girls in law Roy who had an inexplicable applicable outbreak of something that nobody could describe they had ticks. They couldn't control their limbs. This also happened in law Roy to home of Jello. Would you conclude about that so the girls were initially not a mystery and later diagnosed with conversion disorder Amass psychogenic illness conversion disorder being the conversion of emotional trauma stress into physical symptoms and then mass psychogenic illness being sort of tagged onto the end as <hes> the mysterious spread of these symptoms through groups with no real reason for it having spread so that was the the resultant conclusion that doctors may through a process of elimination. My mom really felt that these girls were very obviously responding involuntarily to a culture that was particularly strong in the Roy of silencing women and so as she and I both new through our own experiences when one's voices silent oftentimes the body finds other ways to speak well and for you and your mom you had this mysterious like paralysis of your hands if they would like shape into a claw aw yeah that had happened to me before I knew that it had happened to her and it wasn't until much later when I went back through her memoirs that I saw that how do you draw the Jillow curse to your own story we line which is serious eating disorder at one point. You're only eating sugar free Jello yes so I think that like the girls in the Roy and like my mother before me a lot of my struggle traced back back to not feeling free to speak once I started to speak in express myself in there be until learn that it was safe to do so my symptoms became less present by the way one of the things you couldn't and speak about was that your father was having an affair with your teachers but told you that what you're seeing with your own eyes wasn't true boy it gets intensely personal but again as we said also takes a step back and looks at the history of Jello and there's another irony here because when we think Jello we think this guy we're here to celebrate a different way to eat. Jello gelatin with our is just so interesting to be reminded. The bill cosby was the voice of Jello for decades and turned out to be someone who also had repressed women yeah as the face of Jello he on the surface projected this equal parts data and infantile persona but as as we know now he was really also the face of a certain kind of tradition of silencing women or or working to keep women silent well he allegedly gave them knockout pills absolutely what if people said to you about this Jello hello hold such a place in people's minds. Have they been upset about how you've cast it or what are you hearing well first of all. I've heard a lot of wonderful stories of people's childhood relationships. With Jello I've been gifted recipes. I've been gifted old cookbooks. A lot of people don't see this book as portraying Jello necessarily negatively. I will say that there are some people may be connected Tila Roy who don't feel great about the book. It's a challenge as a writer to write honestly of of a place or person but also to you know not portrayed as anyone thing and how about you. Do you feel you have broken the yellow curse. I hope so I do feel that you know I have sounded my voice and my mother's. It's a constant challenge. I think probably with anyone who puts a book out into the world but for this book in particular to to stand behind by working to stick to my guns when <hes> you know there are many who are coming forward or some who are coming forward. I should say who are proving the point of the book in some ways and trying to shut me up so I think it just proves the importance of I've worked by women that challenges the norms that we still live with and norms that would see us. Stay Silent Alley. Robot book is Jello Girls of Family History Alley. Thank you thank you so much for having me Jello Girls Author Alley robot on the Lucas now out in paperback. It's here support for here. Now and the following message come from ember wave the revolutionary new personal thermostat. That's designed to help you find thermal wellness in any situation amber wave can put you in control of your comfort in places like you're freezing office uncomfortable airplanes in restaurants or theaters after a workout at home and more learn more at ember wave dot com and use code N._P._R.. To say fifty dollars at checkout ember wave own your temperature special counsel Robert Mueller is in his Second House Committee hearing of the day the House Intelligence Committee charged with focusing on possible trump campaign contacts with Russians interfering in the two thousand sixteen election. It was part of Muller's report. Here's Muller With Committee Chair the Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff apart from the Russians wanting to help trump win several individuals associated with the trump campaign. We're also trying to make money during the campaign in transition. Is that correct it is true. Paul Manafort was trying to make money or achieve debt forgiveness from a Russian oligarch mark generally that is accurate Michael Flynn was trying to make money from Turkey Tru. Donald Trump was trying to make millions from a real estate deal in Moscow to the extent. You're talking about the hotel Moscow. Yes yes when your investigation looked into these matters numerous trump associates lied to your team the grand jury and to Congress number of persons that we interviewed and our investigation it turns out did lie Mike Flynn lied. He was convicted of lying. Yes George Papadopoulos was convicted of lying crew. Paul Manafort was convicted of lying through Manafort was in fact when so I encourage other people to lie that is accurate manafort's deputy Rick Gates slide at his accurate Michael Cohen the presence lawyer was indicted for lying true allied to stay on message with the president allegedly by him and when Donald Trump called all your investigation a witch hunt that was also false was not like to thank so yes will your investigation is not a witch hunt as it is not a witch when the president said the Russian interference was a hoax that was false. Wasn't it true earlier earlier today in front of the Judiciary Committee defended his decision to not rule on the question of obstruction of justice. He referred lawmakers to his his report. After many questions including questions about the origins of the investigation he was asked numerous times whether president trump how could be prosecuted after he left office former special counsel mother answered yes but he sidestepped the question of impeachment here he is with Congressman. Jim Sensenbrenner of the Republican of Wisconsin true that there's nothing in volume two of a report that it says that the president may have used an impeachable Kanda well we have studiously kept in the the center of our investigation the mandate and our mandate does not go to other ways of addressing conduct and Muller was asked by the Arizona Democrat Greg Stanton about the criticism that Muller was politically motivated. Some people have attacked the political motivations of your team even suggested your investigation was a witch hunt. When you consider people to join your team? Did you ever even once asked about their political affiliation. Never once in your entire career as a law enforcement forces official. Have you ever made hiring decision based upon a person's political affiliation no. I'm not surprised if I might just interject capabilities that we have shown in report. That's been discussed here today. It was a result of the team agents and lawyers who were absolutely exemplary and rehired because of the value that could contribute to getting the job done and getting it done expeditiously some sounds today's house hearings with Robert Muller. You're will continue to follow them throughout the day. You're listening to here now so you say the news is getting you down. You just can't get away from it this summer well how being transported by music the German early Romantic Eric Composer Felix Mendelssohn is perhaps most famous for a midsummer night's night's dream which he wrote seventeen and then there's the wedding march he later attitude to Felix Mendelssohn and his sister who was also a composer were musical prodigies last Thanksgiving when we asked our classical music expert Fran Hoffner what music she's thankful for. She said Mendelssohn that's mendelssohn Italian symphony which he wrote when he was just twenty four for Fred hopfner the music not only evokes Italy. It is like going on vacation listening to this makes you immediately feel like you are not where you are and it may be helped that I listen to it. When I was on vacation yes in the catskills in New York upstate yeah so beautiful not Italy no but what like how are you listening to? This is walking around in your buds. How how is it coloring you <hes> I was staying in this old school house actually with these big picture windows looking out over the mountains and I we know it was quiet hours on our little trip so I decided I wanted to just listen to something so I put on my big noise? Canceling headphones I put on the symphony almost <hes> spur of the moment decision I hadn't heard it in a couple of years and I just sat and looked out the window for a little and listen to it and have this profoundly moving experience listening to the symphony and imagining the same joy that Mendelssohn I both shared while being on vacation <music> said swept you off your feet. Your love about talking about classical music with you. Some might say that this piece is kind of caricature you know they've heard it over and over but then thinking about looking out a big glass window at upstate New York go anywhere across the country the Grand Canyon prairies it. I hear it again yeah. I think there's a really emotionally mature experience being projected here with the music. Even though Mendelssohn was so young when he wrote it. Let's listen to the Dante <hes> some musicologists call this portion mournful but you know <hes>. Let's listen to a little <music> now. I think this you listen to while you're walking in the rain. Yeah I took a little walk after I was into the symphony for the first time and I was like I think I'm gonNA listen to this right over again. So I took a little walk into into the mountains and it was drizzling slightly but not such that it would really bother me and it just sort of had this. I don't know it's it's a little melancholic but I don't think it's too dire or two mournful and there's something something like sometimes you have bad weather days on vacation and you just got to get through it. Then we go to the third movement Coromoto with motion describe this I think Mendelssohn has allowed a lot of space into this particular movement. The first in the fourth movement are sort of frantic and joyful and this one is so indulgent in its joy. This is where it really. We also have like clicked into place for me on this realism and you say the pieces free from the tyranny of brass. We'd like to speak to some brass players yeah. They're gonNA come for me but they there's a muted the horn trio which then can take the listener by surprise yeah so I don't know it's such a stumbling upon something you didn't happen to come across. It doesn't really like interrupt the motion of it. It's almost as if you the listener discover it rather than Mendelssohn placing it there for are you <music> this a genre of music from this era at tells more about that composers were no longer using music to explore form necessarily a bit now just emotions and memories and little stories so while they're there some like folk folk dances embedded into different parts of this. There's sort of a reference to faust. Perhaps in the second movement this is calling to mine all sorts of different emotional ideas rather than experimenting on just a theme. The Fourth Movement Sell Torello Carello is a after an Italian folk dance so let's listen aw you say this is almost maniacally cheerful. Yeah absolutely it's full burst of energy like trying to get in all the last things you WanNa do before the end the day or the end of the week on a trip I can feel sort of him rushing to get this out well and he wrote his sister fanny that what this is going to be jolly yeah it's going to it was going to be them. One of the most joyful things he's is ever in. I think it's really true but then there's the very very end uh-huh listen and all vacations come to an end they do and I think this ending is a little dark. I think it's a little sad at sadder perhaps than you know the second movement which was thought to be based on you know a funeral march. I think there's the disappointment kind of projected onto the end of this. It doesn't rise to this really emotional home. Happy triumphant you know symbols tiffany big brass ending it sort of just like ends and look <hes> Mendelssohn <hes> grew up in a prominent Jewish family brought up without religion baptized as a Christian at age seven seven out of favour musically for well partly because of anti-semitism talk a little bit about how he was viewed well. This was <hes> really contentious time I guess as many were to follow for Jews in Germany and I think Mendelssohn Adelson really had a lot to overcome that I don't know that he did in the time that he was composing which didn't last very long yeah I mean. How old is he when he died thirty? I think of him the way I do Mozart. They're they're like the too young young M.'s to me because he also had this really prolific youthful career yeah Felix Mendelssohn tied at thirty from a series of strokes his sister fanny at forty two <hes> also from a stroke so we listened to his music even more closely knowing doing how young he was and what might have been and I think the idea of writing about yourself on vacation is kind of I don't know like not a particularly original idea or not a very mature idea but the actual music that he composed host has a real emotional maturity about being emotion that I really connect to classical music expert friend Hoffner rights for W are in New York. Our mendelssohn musical vacation first aired last November enjoy. It's here now. Lead poisoning from Flint Michigan's contaminated water got national attention and action but lead poisoning from other sources has been an entrenched issue in many cities for years Cleveland is one of them with a lot of old houses built before the nineteen seventy-eight lead paint ban the city's grappling with how to fix this problem but in the meantime parents it's worry about the known health effects of the toxin on their children's brain development. It's possible the brain can compensate one thing that might help reading W C._P._S. Anglo Sir filed this report this love yeah I see knows on every face. I see noses every place about a year ago at one years old you didn't Oh beck was found to have a blood lead level of nineteen. Any amount of lead is harmful to young children. Five is the threshold of concern her mother Casey Toby was devastated shock guilt shame fear despair terror sets in and then you you know Google it and it gets even worse. They didn't chipping paint just an old house in Lakewood with friction surfaces causing lead dust that you didn't must have ingested as she called around like any normal toddler they took out alone make their home lead-safe and were told to give Eden healthy foods and a multivitamin but other than that doctors had nothing else to offer her. It was very much a this is it. Let's just watch and wait and see what happens which has a mom is like the worst thing you can hear from a medical professional because you just feel helpless. If I have a child with lead poisoning in front of me I would never say to the parent it's hopeless that's metrohealth pediatrician Dr Robert Nadelmann. We don't know in your individual case what that led may or may not be doing but what we do know is in every case if you talk with your child and listen to your child at half conversations and read books together and learn together together. Your child will be smarter and have more self control and behave better than if you don't do that. The key is to remove the source of lead exposure and provide a nurturing environment. We're learning can happen one on one conversations and interactions promote healthy strong brain connections those kinds of conversations caused the brain to grow in positive ways and essentially combat the negative effects acts of lead while the cellular damage of lead is permanent needle men and other experts say the young brain is highly resilient and they believe it can compensate for the loss if one part of it isn't working very well other parts can take over and also it's growing. It's it's not finished. Nadelmann says reading offers one of the best ways to help the brain bounce back from lead exposure which is why he helped start the national reach out read program where doctors give books to patients and encourage reading looking at pictures naming objects wchs hearing and sounding out words all fire up important connections in the Brain University of Cincinnati researcher. Kim Dietrich was part of a Twenty Fifteen C._d._C.. Working Group that reviewed the scientific literature on ways to help lead expose children the the idea of the concept that children who are exposed to lead early on our lost generation is completely fallacious dietrich. Things reading is an excellent strategy for helping lead exposed children but he and others in the field including needle woman acknowledged that there isn't perfect scientific data on its effectiveness and it wouldn't be ethical to do a perfect study. You couldn't ask some parents to not read to their lead expose children just you'd have control group Case Western Reserve Universities Rob Fisher sure is planning a new study to gather some data about programs that get books into the hands of children with lead exposure Fisher recently co author to study that found that high quality preschool which would have in theory a lot of reading and one on one attention didn't help lead poison kids heads catch up to their peers but there's nuance to their findings we see in the evidence that there are let exposed children who are on track kindergarten and that are on track at third grade. What's allowing them to overcome that adversity? It's very possible that something in like reading and parental engagement in the child's life is the success factor that allows that to happen and one thing more supposed no knows where would all our glasses sit they'd fall off just think of it the end another one for Casey Tobruk reading something she would have done anyway but she's encouraged by the messages of resiliency. I am in a much better place than I was. I've sought out medical professionals of varying degrees. Everyone at this point is reassuring me that we caught it early and that you know her system will is resilient and she will most likely not have any long-term effects facts because we cut it early we got rid of the lead in her environment quickly and her levels have gone down drastically and it lasts count edens. Lead levels are down to three point three below the threshold of concern for here now.

President Trump Muller Jello president trump president Eric Composer Felix Mendelssoh Ryan Lewis Lucas United States special counsel House Judiciary Committee Nevada Jordan staedtler Tila Roy Robin Young Fox News staedtler Paul Manafort America House Select Committee New York
Is Impeachment a Done Deal?

Inside the Hive with Nick Bilton

50:35 min | 2 years ago

Is Impeachment a Done Deal?

"Welcome to inside the hive, I am your host, Nick Bilton. So we are returning to Trump world this week with the one the only Gabriel Sherman who is a special correspondent Vanity Fair. Very very special on he covers the White House politics Rudy Giuliani. Donald boring Trump. He's not boring is just annoying and all things media related, and I'm very very excited to welcome him back to the show gave you there. I am here. Where are you? Right now, you reporting live from Donald Trump's underwear drawer where where are you? That's an image trying to banish her my mind IM in live from vanity fair's offices on the forty first floor of one World Trade Center in sunny in sunny, New York. Well, we flipped the weather. So okay, I'm going to jump. Right in. I think it's what we unlike Dade nine thousand six hundred and forty two of the government shutdown. And it doesn't seem to becoming anywhere even close to a resolution. We have a ton of questions about a big story you broke this week. But I just want to jump into the to the shutdown. What are you hearing? What's going to happen is how is this going to end because it doesn't seem like Pelosi is going to back down. And it doesn't seem like Trump is. You know? That's that's the question. Everyone is asking including people inside the west wing. You know, the reality is is that when Trump declared on TV weeks ago during his televised press event with Pelosi and Chuck Schumer that he'd be proud own the shutdown that was like the classic off the cuff Trump remark. There was no strategic sort of plan behind that. And now they're in the situation where they're in the shutdown. They went Trump went into it with no blueprint for how to get out of it. And he's digging in both sides are digging in obviously, the political landscape is more favorable to the Democrats. You know, polls show most more people are blaming Trump for it, not surprisingly because he said he'd be proud to own it. So, you know. You know logically. The only way this ends. If Trump somehow gives something off of his demand for five point seven billion for the wall. But until I guess Republicans feel enough pain. And I think the key to all of this is Mitch McConnell he stayed on the sidelines for now we've had a couple of Republican senators break with Trump and say, it's time to end the shutdown. I think if you get ten plus Republicans in the Senate saying this is insanity. You're gonna have McConnell then bring a vote to the to the floor. And then you're going to basically have Trump being forced to veto a Republican passed Bill in the Senate? So I think that's where this is going unless Trump comes to a census, which is, you know, Trump is senses is not likely that that's my sort of read of the landscape. Okay. But but one of the problems is McConnell is from a state that doesn't probably from the. Just the numbers. I've looked at doesn't have a lot of government workers. This is not going to he's you know, he's up for reelection. It's it's going to be a tight one no matter which way you slice it. There's not really any incentive for McConnell to do this. I mean, there would be the the moral incentive of the fact that eight hundred thousand people who work for the United States government or not getting paid. But Mitch McConnell's not that kind of person. What what is to what's the thing that actually makes him want to do this? Is it just that his his colleagues are going to be enough enough? Yeah. I mean, that's that's that's that's the great question. You know? I think right now, we have three Republicans Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins and Cory Gardner of Colorado who basically broken, I think if you get, you know, ten plus Republicans flipping there's going to be pressure on McConnell to do something. But as you point out, the sort of short term political calculus for McConnell is to do nothing. And this gets to the heart of the matter. Whether we're talking about the shutdown or the Russia investigation is that the Republican base at this point is basically a personality cult of Donald Trump, you know, even with all of this insanity. He has something like eighty five to ninety percent approval ratings amongst Republicans, you know, several months ago, they did a poll and Trump had the second highest approval rating of any. Publican in the modern era second to George W Bush like in the immediate wake of nine eleven. So, you know, the party the base of the party of the people actually vote in primaries are, you know, one hundred percents still in lockstep with Trump. And so he's got a he's got the party by the balls. And I don't I don't see, you know, unless the Trump base somehow turns on him, which after all of this. They haven't I don't see why they would now that's why you have Republicans even ones who in private say. Trump's a maniac aren't doing anything to to constrain him. So the the right now, we've had one one paycheck that the government employees of missed. It seems like once we get it seems like this is probably gonna go for another couple of weeks until the other paycheck is supposed to go out and doesn't show up before. All hell breaks loose as probably a good assumption. Yeah. But I think you're gonna see things even before. Or that you know, what point does like the chamber of commerce in like country club Republicans who are seeing their their, you know, middle manager employee's stock in TSA security lines. You know, businesses basically grind to a halt. Because the airports are in disarray. I mean, so far, it's it's been limited. But we're hearing reports of our plus waits to get through security, and I know from my reporting that Larry cudlow Trump's top economic advisor has said privately inside the White House that the longer the shutdown goes on you're going to see real negative economic consequences. So that's that's another pressure point is just the disarray leading to you know, a complete slowdown of our economy, which already as we've seen with the stock selloff has been tested. So. Well, I hope that for the sake. I mean, I know people that both the working government and that have been affected by the don't work in government. And it's you know, if it's it's terrible. It's happening in my own little like tiny world, I've been affected by it. I have like a tax form that I need to have mailed out by the IRS, and I can't get anyone on the phone. And so, you know, I'm just basically just in a holding pattern. And and obviously, that's you know, in terms of the pain people are feeling that's nothing. But it just shows you that it's crazy that because of this political fight, you know, we can't even just carry on the business of running this country. All right. So let's move onto one of my favorite Gullam like villains Rudy Giuliani. So you had a story this week in Vanity Fair about rude. Rudy Giuliani is telling people that he's kind of a little fed up with Trump world. And that he expects the Muller investigation to come to a close in the next couple of weeks. Give us a little a little more explanation about what's going on there. Yeah. You know, this story gerrad of reporting I've been doing over the last few weeks. I wrote a piece last week on the subject as well. Which really talked about the kind of difference between what Rudy Giuliani saying and public versus what he's saying in private and in private as I reported last week. You know, he's been telling associates that he expects the the first installment of the Muller report to be quote horrific for Trump Muller's gonna put, you know, everything that's damaging they've. Uncovered in there. And then this week. I I wrote a piece that said that Giuliani is expecting the obstruction of Justice installment of the Muller investigation to be delivered to the Justice department within weeks. Now, we've heard Giuliani say this before, you know, during the midterms he said it would be done by. Labor day. It wasn't but judging by Giuliani's level of concern in conversations with with his friends in allies. Clearly, they have no something or he has a sense of of Muller's timing. Now that in a way that he hasn't in the past and last night, he gave a remarkable interview to Chris Cuomo on CNN in which he basically walked back all of their previous denials of no collusion and Giuliani said well, there may have been collusion. But it just wasn't Donald Trump. It could have been other people. He said I can't guarantee it wasn't other people in the campaign, which we just stop for a second. You know, Trump has been tweeting since day one all caps, no collusion. And now they're now they're answer as well. There might be collusion. I just didn't know about it. I mean that just shows you the level of anxiety and terror that is in a large part of Trump's. Orbit about really what Muller is going to uncover probably or likely in the very near future. Well, it's so fascinating. Because Giuliani has you know from the get-go been. A little bit contentious. When he first came out defending Trump. He made a bunch of little silly errors saying things that were incorrect or he shouldn't have said. What's difficult to understand in love to hear your explanation for us is are the things that he's saying they approved by Trump or is it just Giuliani being senile? This guy who can't even put air pods in his ears properly. Just kind of speaking off the cuff. Yeah. It's it's the ladder. Guiliani is people who worked on the Trump campaign back in two thousand sixteen told me how this was not the same Giuliani who became America's mayor after nine eleven. I mean, he's completely lost his mind. Forgetful, kind of incoherent in a lot of the things he would say, you know, we've seen that same version on on television. And so, you know, one there's been a lot of tension between Trump and Juliani, you know, it's it's kind of I think reflective of the fact that Trump couldn't get really any other real lawyer to defend him. He had the turned to this guy that for the first year of the administration Trump and Giuliani, barely talk Giuliani famously wanted to be secretary of state, and you know, also the attorney general job was in the mix. He was offered neither. And so they basically didn't speak, and there was a lot of residual resentment between the two men. Trump adviser told me a hilarious story about how during the campaign when they would get off Trump's jet at the campaign rallies. They would descend the stairs. And Trump would pose for pictures with supporters, and he'd look over and he'd see Rudy doing selfish with fans and Trump would say to people like what the hell like this guy is shouldn't be getting his picture taken in Trump world. You can't there can't be any other star. But Trump himself so Rudy came to it with his own profile. So there's been some competition between the two, and I I have to do some more reporting. When we when we get off this podcast, but I have to imagine that Trump is blowing up angry at Rudy Giuliani seating. The central argument of his defense over the past year. The other thing that you you pointed out in your story axios also reported that the acting chief stack Mick Mulvaney when they were negotiating this lowdown. This is another person that Trump wants loved and now said to him you just fucked. It all up mic is it these people that surround Trump do they do they look at him and think like, okay, this is my my ability to get attention. This is my Billy to have more power. And then they he shits on them. And they just don't understand the dynamic of people like Giuliani who gets should on and Mulvaney and all these people, but they still want to be closer to him. Well, let's let's we can break those two examples down, you know, in the case of Guiliani, he's relevant in a way that he wasn't twelve months ago. And he's been there's been reporting about how he's been traveling around to all of these shady regimes raising doing. -sulting deals, and you know, basically trading off of his celebrities newfound celebrity being Trump's lawyer. So, you know, there's a business reason why Guiliani would would or I guess I say financial reason why he would subject himself to the abuse from Trump and Mulvaney space. You know, he he is a sort of a right classic right wing on Republican. You know, he ran off Owen be the office management budget for him that was a way to achieve his ideological aims of slashing the government, and and sort of plying right wing dogma to policy. So he got a lot out of that. With the chief of staff job, you know, it's a little different. You know, he he was the last choice again as I reported. He was Jared Kushner's choice. After Nick Ayers, Mike, Pence's chief-of-staff pulled his name out of the running. And so they turn to Mulvaney, and he has the acting chief attach staff, title and. Has he's told friends and associates that I've I've heard about him I reporting he's keeping that acting chief of staff title. So that at any point he can basically pull the Ripcord and get out of there. And it doesn't really look as bad as it would be as few is Trump's real chief-of-staff who would be the I guess the the fourth chief of staff to to leave. And you know, there's been reporting in the times about how Mulvaney is still actively looking to become the president of the university of South Carolina. So, you know, this isn't a guy who is there for ideological reasons to try to strengthen government and already has half a foot out the door. It's so it's it's literally you couldn't make more dramatic. If you if you tried. I had a friend in Hollywood text me this morning after the last twenty four hours a headlines and said, you know, if you wrote all of this stuff into a script. The producer's producers would come back with note saying this is too much unless you're writing farce, take it all out. So, you know, this is an example where the reality is stranger than even people in Hollywood could invent. Yeah, it's it's an it doesn't seem to want to stop. You're listening to inside the high with Nick Bilton. So if you're like me the list of books that you want to read and those people should just you should read is a never ending black hole. And it is always expanding. I have so many books piling up bedside table that I have never gotten to. He simply just don't have enough time to read them. All well, our sponsor this week blinking has solved your long list of must-reads once and for all plinking is the only AB that takes thousands of best-selling nonfiction books in distills them down to their most impactful elements. So you can read or listen to them in just under fifteen minutes all on your phone with blankets. You will expand your knowledge and learn more and just fifty minutes than you can almost any. Other way. Plus, you don't just have to read them. You can listen to them to I like to listen to blankets when I'm in the car, you know, sitting in traffic driving around, but I've also been using it more in those moments where I'd normally pull out my phone waste, fifteen minutes on social networks. Instead I opened blink. And I read a book in just fifty minutes, the blinking library is massive and incredible. There's everything from Daniel cannons thinking fast and slow to the sixth extinction by Elizabeth kolbert. It's just a massive incredible list of books lately, I've been reading a new book on superpowers by Kaifu Lee. And I just this morning started a new book called Napoleon's buttons, which I can't rate dive into after I finish this podcast blinking is constantly curing and adding new titles from their best of lists. So you always find new powerful ideas in made for mobile content there five million people using blankets and every single person. I know who uses it absolutely loves it right now. For a limited time blinking has offered a special special offer for you hive listeners all you need to do is go to blinking dot com slash hive to start a free seven-day trial. Once again, go to blankets B L I N K I S T dot com slash hive you notice that part to start a free seven-day trial blankets dot com slash hive. Once again, that's B L I N K I S T dot com slash. Okay. So one person that we we all see in the headlines every single solitary day and people seem to love or hate her. But they love to talk about her is Akasa Cortes AO see from new strict, I live in in queens and show. Nice. Very very good of my district. Yes. Have you seen her wandering the streets? I have I saw her at a campaign rally. Shortly after she had defeated. Joe crowley. So you know, she was this was before her national celebrity had blown up so sh- she so speaking of national celebrity she is without question. Now, probably one of the most famous. People in government. Besides Trump and Pelosi. You don't necessarily know all the other house members names if any end, and yet everyone knows her one thing I find so fascinating. I go to drudge report a lot just to kinda see what both sides of the lunatic asylum. We're talking about and she is always on the top of the page. There's always two three four articles there, no matter which conservative website, you go to they're always talking about her and the same on the left. What do you know anything about? How Trump feels about her in the fact that she's getting all this attention and can't seem to be, you know, she's almost got like a Teflon Don thing where nothing negative sticks even uh. There isn't really anything negative about her. That's a great question. I haven't heard specifically about you know, what he how he used her as a political opponent. I think in the right now his focus is on Pelosi because she has actual power over him. You know, ANC has media power, and you know, the power to shape, the democratic party's policy agenda. But in terms of actually Donald Trump's day-to-day. You know exists. She's I don't think he doesn't see her as an immediate threat. But that is a great question just about how she's you know. I'd love to know more about his the way he thinks of her as kind of a media adversary in the way, she's been able to commandeer the new cycle because as Trump as we know anything that takes the new cycle away from Trump is something that is going to draw his ire, do you think that the has a chance she's twenty nine now. So it's at least years away. But do you think this is someone that is going to take the Nancy Pelosi path of staying the highest points of government within the in congress, or do you think that there's a world in which we see? Running for for president. You know, it's it's hard to see her grinding it out, you know, for the next twenty five years in in congress. Even if she gets, you know, committee, chairmanships or party leadership. You know, this is she's clearly someone that wants to have, you know, direct sort of executive say over both the party, and also, you know, the national agenda. So clearly, she someone who it would be entirely logical has presidential ambitions. But you know, I think predicting what we can't even predict what's going to happen in the new cycle. Six six minutes from now, let alone six years from now. So we never heard of AO see as of last summer. So I think the real test will be, you know, once she you know, she sworn in. She's now a member of the United States house of representatives. I think you know, whether she can actually, you know. Pass legislation or move the party in her direction. Then you know, we'll sort of see what kind of staying power. She has I think, you know, kind of the the obsession with her biography and her age and her sort of charisma and her her media prowess. I think is going to wear off the sixty minutes interview. She did was you know, again, so sort of so focused on on her story and in growing up in the Bronx, and whether she thinks Donald Trump is a racist or not I think whether she can actually get the Democratic Party to embrace seventy percent top marginal tax rates. That's where we'll see her having a real political future. It's it's definitely interesting. I mean, she is without question. Whether she ends up, you know, running or not yours from now, she is having a massive impact on the party. But the thing that I find so fastening what you just said is last summer. No one had ever heard of her. And I think that when you kind of look at the Bill. For someone to become a presidential candidate in the same way. Trump went from descending. His elevator with paid actors Trump Tower to becoming president of the United States. You know, anything is possible these days as far as you know, one thing that I've been thinking a lot about is going into this twenty twenty election in in the democratic primaries, you know, you look at the rise of AFC, you know, one of the consequences of that. Is it really calls into question? You know, what is the Democratic Party because you know, for you know, really since Bill Clinton in the early nineties. It's been this coalition of social liberals and Wall Street and. I think you really see that breaking down. I mean, even Barack Obama for all of his progressive. Cred? You know, he really kind of aligned himself with the establishment and the service center left of the Democratic Party, you know, bringing in people like Steve Rattner in Tim Geithner and others. So you know, AFC clearly is trying to move the party away from that. As did Bernie Sanders. But you know, if that's the case where do, you know, Jamie diamond and other sort of centrist, Democrats go there clearly not gonna vote for Trump. But if the democratic candidate for president wants to have top incomes over five or ten million dollars tax at seventy plus percents. I don't think we're in the sort of fundamental realigning of of American politics and create space for a third party or another billionaire to run in the middle. I mean, I don't I don't know. But I think that's what I'm I find. So fascinating in the civil war. That's going on right now in the Democratic Party is the sort of the old coalition that Hillary and Obama and Bill Clinton ran on is completely breaking down. Well, it's also very similar to the civil war that went on in, you know, in twenty fifteen and twenty sixteen leading up to to the election you had for the Republican party. Yeah. You had a party that I remember reading articles and stuff you've written and all over the place about how the Republican party was was essentially rudderless, the no one knew which direction it was supposed to go and who supposed to appeal to and I think Trump seized on that, and it seems like the this for twenty twenty the same thing is going to be true for the Democratic Party. And who knows how many election cycles will take to play before they actually do find a core for sure. Okay. So one thing that I am trying to understand is this week Nancy Pelosi sent a letter to the president saying that he should probably delay his state of the union address, which was essentially not a probably, but it was an I'm going to delay it. She has a tremendous amount of power right now as a great quote in in Washington Post article, she wields the knife and can undercut Trump no matter where she wants to how she wants to. Can you explain a little bit more about how Pelosi can really fuck with Trump? And what thinks that she can do and that she will do and things that he may be able to do in response. Well, let's just you know, let's just take the start with the state of the union example, you know, both sides new or no that Trump wants to use the state of the union address to again, make another primetime pitch. To build his wall. As I reported yesterday. Trump has no real incentive to end the shutdown before the state of the union. So that he could use TV time to sell his wall and Pelosi sm- smart enough to know that she has the power because the new she is the speaker of the house of representatives. And constitutionally the state of the union is is an event that is the president is invited to address both houses of congress by the speaker. So she has that power to essentially uninvite him or delay, the state of the union constitutionally second, you know, she is now presiding over a democratic caucus that is, you know, running all of these committees in. It's going to basically plunge the White House into subpoena hell for the next year and a half. And she has the power just to chip away and tie up the White House in one committee hearing after another I think, but the the one thing I think is not getting enough. Attention is the degree to which she is also proven to be such an effective adversary on sort of as a communicator, and I'll tell you I'll be the first to admit I'm surprised about that going into her speakership. I was thinking that the Democratic Party was going to repeat all the mistakes of twenty sixteen and a point kind of out of touch of you know, sort of a veteran of the party who was not sort of a telegenic or authentic communicator, the way Trump is, and in fact Pelosi has been able to kind of you know. Whatever fault. She had and kind of being aloof for San Francisco liberal. She's been able to, you know, Perry Trump and sort of paint him as ill-informed non serious and and throwing temper tantrum, and she's the grownup in the room. And so I think that sort of her power as as, you know, the third most powerful person in government to command. The new cycle is something that Trump hasn't had to contend with for the last, you know, since you know, since two thousand sixteen so I've I've been very impressed with her power just as a communicator. If you look at the way, she was in his Oval Office sit down with with Schumer. She said, we're gonna have a fact based discussion not not basically Trump's racist and emotional peels to build a wall. So both her ability to time up in in investigations and her ability to just, you know, wage rhetorical warfare on him is is a new. This is a new chapter of the Trump presidency. And so far. I mean, I think no matter what your politics are. You would say that. She's winning. It's no you're completely right? She's been she's almost plays this kind of maternal supervisor towards him. But not in a like, I care about you more. And like a you're being a little brat, and I'm not gonna put up with this. And and he he's he for whatever reason because he knows how to go go toe to toe with anyone he's he seems to be failing when it comes to Pelosi. So it'll be interesting to see how he responds. So just the second part of that question while she's doing all these things, you know, tying them up with subpoena power telling him, you can't come to the state of the union, he's grounded. Can't play with his toys. What is it that Trump can do to her? Can you just other than just tweet? Well, I mean, this this is hopefully, this is the strength of the American political system that's their Coequal branches of government. So he obviously has the bully pope pulpit of the presidency to to attack her. You know, he can he can veto her legislation to the degree to which the Senate would ever, you know, agreed McConnell, run Senate, whatever send a Bill that comes out of Pelosi's house to the to the White House, which I you know, sort of unlikely although we did see it with criminal Justice reform. Yeah. I mean, he doesn't have the problem is he doesn't have a lot of actual leverage over her other than, you know, his platform, and you know, as we were just talking about she's been. More than up to the task of of challenging him in the communications war. So this is Trump seems kind of lost in riderless. He doesn't he doesn't know how to engage with her because she has real political power. You're listening to inside the high with Nick Bilton. The New Yorker represents some of the best writing in America today and the New Yorker also holds people in power accountable through rigorous reporting and compelling, storytelling. Both online imprint the New Yorker covers a full range of topics from politics, News, International affairs, climate change, the environment. Pop culture, the arts fiction theater food humor, you name it. And of course, my personal favorite which go to every single day to check out the cartoons people who write for the New Yorker are so eloquent, and they write so beautifully. And they cover stories that you would never in a million years actually think about reading about. But they are so indebted incredible. Like the diminishing supply of sand and hunting down heirloom beans stories about paper, jams and faultlines and stink bugs just incredible stuff. They have some of the the greatest writers around today from Hilton als theater critic, Ronan Farrow, of course, we all know who took down Harvey Weinstein unless Moonves with his surprise winning, right? Writing. I tend to go to the New Yorker several times a day to kind of read all the different things reading about. Just today. I read an amazing article, which I had no idea existed about the ambulance driver shortage in rural America. There was another great story about socialism. And how would it has to do with sex one of my favorite writers, John Cassidy talking about Theresa May and the government shutdown in England with Brexit and all the chaos that's going on there. It's just a fantastic fantastic magazine and news online outlet that you can spend hours reading all different kinds of things the New Yorker is going to offer hive listeners a very special treat this week. In fact, it is one that you will not want to miss up. You can get twelve weeks of the New Yorker for just six dollars that is less than the price of one of those fancy bespoke silly coffees that we will spend all our money on. Plus, and this is the best part, you get an exclusive New Yorker tote bag, which I have and I used to carry around all my fancy. Stuff. You can go to the New Yorker at New Yorker dot com slash hive. That's New Yorker all one word dot com slash HIV. Listeners will save fifty percent when they enter the code hive you get twelve weeks for six dollars. You get home delivery of the printed edition unlimited access to New York dot com with ten to fifteen exclusive site only stories every single day you can get access to their apps. Online archive. Crossword puzzles once again, New Yorker dot com slash hive. Okay. We only have a little the ten minutes left. But I have I have a few more questions for you. I want to jump to the Muller report. So what is it that you're hearing? And what is it that we can expect is this going to be, you know, there are some people out there saying, oh, it's you know, it's going to be so redacted by the department of Justice that you won't actually we won't know anything. There are some people out there saying it's going to be a massive bombshell. What is it that we're hearing that's actually going to happen? As a result of this thing. Well, you know, we're hearing mixed things we saw in the confirmation hearing the other day with. William Barr Trump's nominee to be attorney general. He basically said that Muller will deliver his report to him and and bars under no obligation to release, you know, he will release a summary an executive summary, but he's under no obligation to release. The underlying report that said congress has oversight. And what this report is is Trump because Trump's president he has a unity from any kind of criminal prosecution, but this report could provide the underlying predicate for foreign impeachment. So I think obviously as citizens, and as you, and I as journalists wanna see every sentence that's in that report. But the only thing the report has to provide is enough for congress to introduce articles of impeachment to then have a trial in in the Senate, which would then air. Presumably as much of the non classified evidence as as they as they could. And you know, again, there's there's all sorts of scenarios in which the democratic controlled house could subpoena could subpoena Muller. And you know, I'm not. An expert on congressional procedure. But I just have to think that in in this, you know, hyper partisan age that there will be enough outrage on the left to make sure that whatever Muller has uncovered will see see the light of day. It might not be, you know, overnight that he delivers his report to Justice, and you know, is immediately in the Washington Post York the next morning, but there will be a groundswell of political opposition to make sure that Muller's report report, you know, has exposure to congress, and ultimately, the, you know, the public will even if, you know, the DOJ in the White House and whoever says, you know, this tries to keep it under wraps. There's no scenario in which the Democrats don't leak it. Right. Yeah. I mean again, yes because oversight power if you know the committees. The house oversight committee or the judiciary committee. You know, Jerry Nadler could subpoena the report and yes, democratic staff members could leak it. Yeah. I mean, I just think, you know, once once a document is set set down, you know, unless you know. It's it's just, you know, this is not a CIA operation. You know, everyone in America, everyone in America knows that this report is being produced. So presumably if there is some try to Trump does try to wrangle some cover up to to prevent it from being made public. I think it's ultimately it's going to be impossible to do that. So you mentioned the word impeach impeachment. And there's a the cover story for the Atlantic. This this week is a giant blue cover. With giant red words that literally say the word impeach, and it's an article written by senior editor Yoni Appelbaum who who says essentially that it's time now for congress to rein in the president who is who is clearly undermining American ideals, and you know, I don't think anyone would argue with that. And but in this been, you know, Nancy Pelosi said that, you know, didn't say that she wouldn't do it. If it if necessary last month, do you think that? So you have that on one side. But on the other side, you know, as you said earlier in this podcast. There's no way in which the Republicans the Republicans won't even turn on Trump for things that they grossly disagree with including the government shutdown over a stupid wall. That isn't gonna do a goddamn thing. Is there any world in which any Republicans get behind the Democrats in an impeachment process? I I'd like to think there is the ideal is to me. But the the sort of realist knows that this Republican party has has sold out any, you know, principles to again, as I said earlier, it's a cult of personality of this, you know, realist failed real estate mogul. So I think the issue is a couple of things one what is Muller actually, have you know, as much as we've read the tea leaves. And we, you know, we think it looks bad. You know, we don't know the full scope of what he has. So if this report comes down the line, and it is like, you know, to the to the level of Trump, basically Trump is, you know, on the phone with Putin saying, yeah, like, you know, hacker emails, then I think you have Republicans who are up for re election in twenty. Maybe especially in kind of purple states would have the political. Reason to want, you know, actually, you know, have a real trial in the Senate. But again, I just think you as you pointed out, it's this party. They disagree with him on so many issues that whether from trade to Syria. To even you know, immigration, the hardcore base of the party wants to limit immigration. But you know, you had the re- the GOP back in twenty twelve writing a report saying they need to find ways to reach out to Hispanic and other minority communities. So, you know, I think that ship has sailed, and I think just going real quickly back to Pelosi's view of impeachment. I think she's been really smart on this on this front. Again, this whole idea of her kind of playing the resident grownup in the room as much as that phrases overused in the Trump era by not kind of being rabid foreign, peach mint, and and and you know, leading that parade by by kind of letting the that that whole conversation be driven by underlying facts. And and you know, the base of the party clearly as agitating for impeachment, but she's kind of holding back and letting Muller to his thing. So that then when that report lands, she's. A much stronger position to make it look like she's acting in the interests of the country and not just the party. All right. Let's move very briefly to the last part of this podcast, which is going to be twenty twenty. I am in the belief that Cardi B is going to be the democratic nominee. And did you see her video? She was bucking amazing. I need I need to see that. Oh, it's amazing. You gotta watch Cardi B has a a one minute Instagram video where she she literally just rips into Trump and his policies in a very poetic way. And it was funny yesterday. A lot of senators were were tweeting at each other saying should I repeat this because it's a little profane. And it's also it's also Cardi B who there's more videos of her but online than there are her singing. And but it's the so the question I have is. This is a question. You know, I'm sure you're asked all the time. But do you think the Trump will win twenty twenty? You know, I go back and forth. I think the. You know? I I guess the bottom line is. I don't want to predict because any political prediction as much as you know. It's fun to to do. It is just I think we've all after twenty sixteen in the kind of the black swan nature of Trump beating Hillary made any kind of political punditry or prognostic future looking political punditry just looks completely stupid. But, you know, having said that I think the left as much as all of us here, New York, and I'm sure your your community in LA, you know, in this bubble that that Trump is. Completely unfit to govern. And of course, this was just a one time fuck up that, you know, America, you know, pick this pick this president. I think you know, that that underestimates both Trump's. Strengths as a campaigner and the democratic party's just sort of historical ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. So I think I think I guess I would say I am I am I think Mullah ultimately comes down to Muller Muller comes up with a enough evidence that just makes Trump completely toxic and and railroads amount of office. That's you know, that will answer that question. But that said if it's a wash and Muller comes up with some bad stuff. But enough for Trump to say that this was an over hyped which hunt hoax that that has been cooked up by the deep state. I think the Democrats would be really foolish to think that that it's going to be. An easy election in twenty especially because we did see the the the Blue Wave eighteen but the way the electoral college works. Yeah. I mean, Trump is down in states like Michigan, and and Wisconsin. But you know, he's holding pretty strong in Pennsylvania, and just are are are dysfunctional sort of illiberal democratic electoral college system give so much weight to to the lower population states that are you know, in the definitely in two sixteen went to Trump's. So I guess I would say it's it's it is more. It's more likely than Democrats would like to admit that Trump gets reelected in twenty. I'll leave it there. Ready to vomit right now. All right for the twenty twenty candidates. I mean, just in the last week alone. You had you know, Senator Kristen gillibrand of New York. Tell Stephen Colbert that she was launching an exploratory committee to run for president. You had Senator Sherrod Brown. From Ohio announcing Massembe see that he was going on tour for four states to to check things out. You've got you know, Julianne Castro the former HUD secretary you've got I mean, it just keeps going Hawaii. Minnesota all these senators and former government officials that are announcing that they are either running or exploring running or exploring exploring. Who who's gonna kind of who can stand up to the sky? You know? That's what Joe Biden is asking that question. And he's you know as Vanity Fair and others have reported. He is making the argument that he is the best to quipped kind of being the elder statesman of the party, and you know, a blue collar blue collar Joe who can appeal to the Trump voters. But my fear is is that the Democratic Party is gonna nominate someone so far to the left that Trump is going to be able to sort of scare. You know, the sort of blue collar white voters who voted for him last time that, you know, this is again, a party that wants to, you know, take from white people and give to Brown people, which is the same racist argument that you know, he made in two thousand sixteen and you know, scarily enough in America that was affective you. So, you know, I think the Democratic Party is like we were just talking about the civil war. It seems like, you know, from all the candidates that have declared, you know, we saw Jila brand say that she wants Medicare for all in policies like that. The party is clearly moving left and. You know that I think it's too early to tell, but you know, the the danger is that it creates enough space in the middle for Trump to to kind of prevent them to those voters from from flipping. From where they were in twenty sixteen. So that's that's the question. You know, g of quite your point about which candidates are declaring, you know, can take on this guy. I mean, I think this is clearly a another consequence of party that has no leader. So it's going to be a free for all jump ball with, you know, fifty people scrambling for the nomination, and you maybe there's somebody out there. You know, I'm trying to remember back in eight when Obama declared, you know, no one had really been talking about him until you know. So there may be someone out there. Whether it's beta or or others who was not part of the conversation until the last few months. All right. So last question, and this is one that we don't normally ask because we're too busy focusing on Trump, which is insane. Because that's all we've done for the last three and a half years, but put aside who can beat him who do you actually think would be the best president to take over the White House next? Like actual person. Or what person who who would? I think be the best for the country. You know, I think we need someone putting specific personalities aside. I think we we need somebody that can restore faith in institutions. I think that the long term damage from the the short term damage of Trump is just the day-to-day chaos and dysfunction in the shutdown and all that the long term damage beyond the climate change, which you know, is probably going to you know, and all of us in our in our lifetime is the long term damage that Trump is as inactive is basically the sense that objective reality and truth is relative and facts are things to be to baited. And so regardless of party, I think the bit my biggest hope for our political system. Whether it's twenty or twenty twenty four is a sense that we can what's the cliche patch? Dan, Patrick morning hand, quote, you know, you're entitled you're. Own opinions, but not your own facts that we can at least return our politics two to reality based. Terrain and that we someone who believes in institutions believes that lying has consequences in all of that. You know that said during that will happen, maybe not this. This genie has been let out of the bottle, and is you've written so much about just the destructive effects of platforms and social media. I just don't I I don't see how we return to political system in a media system where there are objective facts, and we can all kind of debate issues, but we're all kind of agreeing on what those issues are. Yep. Completely from from your mouth to Donald Trump's airs that he's listening. But yeah. Yeah. Exactly. All right. So Gabe Sherman. Thank you so much for taking the time today. This has been fascinating. I am going to be sitting around with bated breath waiting for this report come out hopefully in the next couple of weeks because I don't think I can handle much more of this. And thanks a lot for for taking the time today. Thanks for having me and stay dry on the rare rainy day. I know the one time of the year that it rains talks him. Great. Thanks. Thanks to my guest this week. Gabe sherman. Have you enjoyed this conversation? And I am sure that you did be short listening described the great episodes of inside the hive with Nick Bilton. That's that you can find us on apple podcasts radio dot com or any way. You get your podcast. Don't get to leave a review while you're there. Thanks for the folks. Cadence thirteen for their incredible amazing production work. And things, of course to my sponsors link list and the New Yorker magazine. Please support them the same way. You support this podcast. We'll see you next week.

Larry cudlow Trump Trump Trump Muller Trump Donald Trump president Nancy Pelosi White House Trump Tower Rudy Giuliani Democratic Party Democrats Nick Bilton congress Mitch McConnell America Trump United States Senate Vanity Fair
A Conversation with Dahlia Lithwick and Matt Miller

The Al Franken Podcast

44:51 min | 2 years ago

A Conversation with Dahlia Lithwick and Matt Miller

"Welcome to the alpha ankle podcast this week. I got something of a topical show, most of our podcasts are, are, evergreen. They have a long shelf life. They're not tied to the events of the day, for example, last week, we had reiterate Sukumar from voter Latino on and she, she talked about immigration and voter suppression and those things will be kind of topical for a long time, when fortunately, I think, but today, the subject is so urgent and the subject is the house of representatives, how it's dealing with. What is or isn't a constitutional crisis and to me, it is. I have two guests today. Dahlia lipoic, a brilliant lawyer who writes about the courts for slate or I was on the judiciary committee. In the in the Senate, and my first week in the body, I was asking questions of now Justice Sonia Sotomayor in her confirmation hearing, and I made the argument that the Roberts court far from being an empire calling balls and strikes. It was an activist court. Now you hear that all the time. But I was kind of the first to make that argument, at least in a supreme court confirmation hearing and here is what Dahlia lipoic wrote for slate about my questioning. Some of the only questioning along those lines came from Senator Al Franken who made soda my, your very uncomfortable as he grilled her on the Roberts courts tendency to overreach in this turns Voting Rights Act case, the court came close to striking down an active congress and in an age discrimination case it's a sided issue that was never briefed Franken politely asked. So to my your, how often have you decided a case on an argument or a question that the parties have not briefed? He was wondering whether that constituted judicial activism, good question. Why was the junior Senator from Minnesota? The one sworn in only a week ago, the first one ask Gant that's why is on the podcast and also because she's one of those lawyers, who's on MS. NBC all the time. And my other guests, Matt Miller is on MSNBC so much. He gets paid to be an MSNBC contributor and mad is not a lawyer, but he was spokesman for Eric Holder. Of course, bombs attorney general. So he might as as wealthy, but actually this is one of my complaints about how the media and Democrats in congress are dealing with this whole Russia, Trump Muller report deal. And I'm afraid we're losing the argument. And one of the problems is what I call drama lack. The lack of drama every night on MSNBC on every show, there's a host who introduces their panel. And it's joining me is David Goldstein former prosecutor from the southern district of New York and MSNBC contributor, Sarah Genting, a former federal prosecutor from the eastern district of New York, and also and MSNBC contributor and line will shunned ler a former federal prosecutor from the western district of New York, and Lionel is also and MSNBC contributor. And then, you know later, Lionel will be saying, like you know Lawrence. I think that the motion that stones lawyer filed today in the northern district of Virginia is very interesting because I think it may signal that he may go down the road of a possible plea bargain Lawrence will say, that's this fascinating and it's not fascinating. It's not. I think we gotta be a little bit. More dramatic in our communication, a lot of people around Donald Trump have said that he resented the investigation into Russia's interference in the two thousand sixteen election because it would undermine the legitimacy of his election. No kidding. You know why it would undermine the legitimacy of his victory because without Russian interference? Trump, probably would've lost the election. He won Pennsylvania, and Michigan and Wisconsin by little over one hundred thousand votes total. Of course, we'll never know we will never know but I'm gonna play to people who claim they know the first is vice President Mike Pence, and the second is former DHS secretary Kirsten Neilsen Russia meddled in our twenty sixteen elections. And while no actual votes changed any attempt to interfere in our elections, is an affront to our democracy, and it will not be allowed, although no actual votes for change in two thousand sixteen. Let me be clear in this any attempt to interfere in our elections is a direct attack on our democracy. Okay. How much does that insult your intelligence how much? Did it insult the intelligence of everyone who knows, for example, that campaign spend money for a reason to persuade people to vote for them or at least not for their opponent to connect with people digitally to get out negative information about their opponent to create ads from fake organizations created by super PACS, which campaigns do all the time now since citizens United. But in this case fake organizations were created by Russians to target very specific voters like the organization woke blacks was aimed at African-Americans to get them not to vote for killary. There's a reason that these things make a huge difference in a campaign, especially one that was this damn close and how big an advantage does it give you. To hack the her sides Email, and put out whichever part of their Email that you'd like to put out exactly the right time say the day before the democratic national convention to help your candidate and hurt the other. And at the end of the campaign. If you look at Hillary's word cloud, it was one big word emails, what, what two Pence in Nielsen say when they're handed the speech with the no votes changed in it with that one. The they no. You can't say that. I mean, of course votes change because of Russian interference. And in one direction away from Hillary and toward Trump or Jill Stein, or, or just no one. Do they think, well, you know, this is what the boss wants to believe, and besides no one will remember this anyway. Well, I do I remember it. And I want you to as well. And I want you to remember the kids Kerstin Nielsen separated from their families. And wasn't the national security adviser fired for lying to the vice president. But the vice president and the president feel perfectly free to lie constantly to the American people. And now the attorney general to the point where the attorney general of the United States, refuses to testify to the House Judiciary committee. Which is because they know he has been lying about the mullahs report. He told the American people two hours before the Muller report was released that the report concluded that the president fully cooperated with the special counsel. No, he he didn't. And bar said the report concluded that the Trump administration didn't collude with the Russians reports said, no such thing as we know collusion. There was collusion. According to the mall report, Trump campaign chairman, Paul Manafort periodically shared internal polling data with Constantine Kalinic a Russian Ukrainian on the races. In four key, battleground states, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Now, our intelligence community has identified Kalinic as someone with close ties to Russian intelligence if not a Russian GRU agent himself. GRU is there CIA the FBI kind of a combo? I'm sure this data found its way to the internet research agency. The internet trolling center run by the GRU out of Saint Petersburg. The Russians micro, targeted Americans Facebook and Twitter and other social media to convince them to vote for Trump or for Jill Stein, or for no one at all the Russians use Facebook to target African Americans in Philadelphia in Detroit, and Milwaukee who had shown an interest in black lives matter. These voters African Americans in Philadelphia, Detroit, and Milwaukee received Email after Email about Hillary super predators. Mark, remember that in nineteen ninety four. She said there were superpredators and that was considered racist. Because that law did put a lot of people for very minor offenses in prison for a long time. And many of those, it was disproportionately African American. So that was pounded in this is why it made a difference the under vote for African Americans in Detroit for president. That is the number who cast vote down ballot but didn't cast a vote for president among African Americans in Detroit alone was over seventy thousand votes and Trump won Michigan by fewer than twelve thousand. Also remember that the Russians hacked the emails of the DNC and of Hillary's campaign chair, John Podesta and released them through WikiLeaks at crucial times in the election cycle, the day before the gavel came down at the democratic national convention, Wicky leaks. Release the Russian hacked internal emails of the Democratic National Committee emails, which show that some staffers at the DNC favored, Hillary over Bernie, it's questionable weather, and what extent and in what way, the personal views of DNC staffers expressed in those emails, were acted upon, but they certainly gave Bernie supporters clause to believe that the DNC put its thumb on the scale during the primary season that doesn't happen without Russian hacking, and there is no. No question that many Bernie supporters just carried that resentment throughout the rest of the campaign, and did not vote for Hillary when they otherwise probably would have. The pedestrian emails, the came out. Just a few hours after the access Hollywood video, you know, which kind of suggested some coordination between WikiLeaks and the Trump campaign specifically in the person of Roger stone. We don't know that from reading the Muller report because the stone indictment was part of the redacted material, but we do know this from the original stone indictment. Here's what it said during the summer two thousand sixteen stone spoke to senior Trump campaign officials about organization one organization. One is WikiLeaks and information it might have had that would be damaging to the Clinton campaign stone was contacted by senior Trump campaign officials to inquire about future releases by organization. One. Stone was bragging to his friends. I just talked to Julian Assange. No collusion stone being a go between for the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks. That's not that's not cushion Manafort handing over internal polling data from Wisconsin Michigan and Pennsylvania's, not collusion. Russian interference forever. De-legitimize Trump's election in my view. And here discuss what we should do about it or Dahlia lipoic from slate who writes about our courts in jurisprudence, and Matt Miller. The former spokesman for during general Eric Holder. Now dally has a podcast or self amicus which, which means friendly and we're doing something with amicus, which is were both posting podcast from this interview which is very amiable same route. Yes. An amicus I'm told that we pronounce the show wrong, because we call the slate podcast and Magus, but my Latin my friends who are fluent in Latin say, it's a meekest my Roman friends and, and Justice briar just to confound things says it's a Michael not. Kreis. Well name Brier named were name-dropping already. But for the non lawyers this. Okay. That was right. That's Matt Miller, everybody, the, the non lawyer, who called you on it. It's everyone knows who Justice briar is I mean, they everyone listening to this. I think I think so, you know, Matt, of course, Dahlia, not a lawyer, but he called you on. You don't want. I heard Christi the other day, you didn't happen to see this with sessions and Chrissy. I did you did. Okay. How many times did they say Democrats just have to understand that Trump won the election and, and just get over it? Well, he stole the election. By cooperating by colluding with the Russians and bar was lying. More on page two. Right says that we apply the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of collusion now diet, explain that way. He's just that there's no such thing as a formal legal matter, as collusion, even though the president uses it as his Goto word. And so what he says, since that's got no formal legal salient, meaning we will use conspiracy law. So he essentially says, when everybody says that this is a binary question collusion. No collusion is legally immaterial to him. That's not a word. That's what he's saying. So, in fact, I read some of the what the prosecutors in the wrote in the indictment for a stone, and they say this, this is in the indictment during the summer of two thousand sixteen stone spoke to senior Trump campaign officials about orgnization one. And information it might have had that would be damaging to Clinton campaign stone was contacted by senior Trump campaign officials to inquire about future releases. By organization. One and organization. One is Wicky leaks. So boy, that's not collusion. How is that not collusion? And listen to what bar said in the press conference about this. A put this in for a reason. The special counsel also invested whether any member or filial of the Trump campaign, and Kirsh, otherwise played a role in these dissemination efforts under applicable law. Publication of these types of materials would not be criminal. Unless the publisher also participated in the underlying hacking conspiracy. Here. Two special counsels report did not find that any person associated with the Trump campaign illegally participated in the, the Semin of the materials. I'm glad you caught that because his language was so carefully worded there, and it came after in that press conference he went through the other things. The Russians did he went through the social media peration and then said the investigation found, there was no collusion with the social media operation. He went through the hacking and said the investigation found there was no collusion with the hacking. Then when he got to this piece about the dissemination of the hacked e mails. He didn't say there was no collusion. He used this very carefully worded line. You said that will. And the section of the report that would contend that shows you what happened. There is blocked out because it pertains to the ongoing Roger stone case. So we don't actually know what it is that happened. Of course. In fact, that was not what I read about the charges in the indictment were not in the report. Right. That's right. And so because I'm fascinated with this. I'm convinced stone was bragging everybody that he was talking to Assange. And how many hour how long was it after the access Hollywood tape came out that the pedestrian emails came out, like two hours, same-day? I mean you could argue that assigns. Could known to do that. And I suppose. But come on. Is the problem here that we don't have adequate? Conspiracy laws. I don't know if. Our legal framework for how we think about conspiracies and hacking and disseminating heck material is sufficiently updated to deal with the current world over the last two years, the bar for acceptable. Presidential behavior has been basically said at outright, criminality or not, this gets the point you were talking about the conversation on cable, or you have former prosecutors asked, you know, take something take some in the presence into well, would this be legal? And what we found out in the report is at least with let's leave the obstruction part aside from where I think he did violate the law and the report makes clear he did that on the collusion side. It seems possible that it is the president or candidate for the presidency. United States can basically operate in parallel to a Russian intelligence operation. He can ask the Russians publicly to hack his opponents emails. He can then was Joe. Yeah. Of course it was a joke. Like so many jokes. These fun. Yeah. Sure. He's got a great sense. He, he can ask them publicly and it seems privately with is communications with Roger stone to, to hack his opponent. He can trumpet the results of that hack when they're made public can talk about Wicky leaks something like a hundred and forty times on the campaign trail. I love and as long as, as you've never met with them and come to an explicit agreement. You haven't violated conspiracy law and is the president outright criminal or not. Is that the only bar we ought to have for the present the United States, of course, not, of course, not, but bar. Okay. So he says, and this is why I was disappointed with the way the questions were asked in the judiciary committee when he was before the judiciary committee, because he said that Trump completely cooperated toy. Totally cooperated with the investigation. He fired. Oh me. He fired the head of the investigation. Then he ordered is legal counsel to tell Rosenstein to fire Mahler, and when he wouldn't do that, when, again, wouldn't do that he ordered Mcgann to drop a fake memo. Untrue memo saying, I didn't ask you to do that when I did. And he kept asking sessions on recused himself. So he could fire Mahler. And as you point out before we just went on here he didn't sit down for an interview. But. My question in committee would have been this you Mr. bar. Mr. jury general said that the Trump, totally cooperated with, with the investigation, and I go through what I just went through, and I'd say in Minnesota. Firing the head of an investigation. And then ordering your subordinates to fire the next head of the investigation isn't cooperating and what I wanna know is to the people, South Carolina believe that Mr Chairman. Because if they do they're very, very, very different than the people Minnesota. Okay, so Al. And how about the people in your damn State, Mr bar. Yes. Go ahead. Can I just point out that having opened with an indictment of MSNBC for bringing legal talking heads onto parsley questions? We're now parsing legal questions. Right. Like what we're doing is exactly the we're doing interesting. So that's my point. No. But my point is I think that thing that matches said, which is, why are we taking it face value that there is a legitimate debate to be had about whether the president cooperated with the investigation. The mere fact that we're expending energy, having a conversation about an assertion that was made about the president's willingness to cooperate with Muller when, in any rational world, we all know, for all the reasons you just laid out he failed to cooperate. Why are we having this debate on his ground? Why seating, the conversation to let's sit here and parse whether or not something we all know to be ally is ally. Why are we doing that? That's why we're way you parse. It is the way you parson and what I was saying. When I wrote to my former colleagues was, we need some drama. So if you say to the chairman of the judiciary committee, are, are you really saying? That the attorney general's being square with us. Are you kidding me? Then people see that. And they don't here. Someone just saying like. This is technically this, not technically that when I'm saying is you need a little bit. And I'm not saying you gotta yell. You can say you can say, but you gotta use a little human emotion. You have to understand the stakes of this, and the stakes of this are incredibly high. And this would have been about the attorney general is lying. He's lying. That makes a difference. It's about the attorney general lying to the American people before the release of the report. So the American people aren't going to read the report. But they are going to watch TV. And we need somebody. To dramatize what the hell is going on? And I don't like the attorney general lying to everybody. Two hours before the release of the thing. My God, I mean how, how infuriating that? So what you're saying is actually super interesting. I think Michelle Goldberg just wrote a really good column saying if this is a constitutional crisis. Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Nadler like you keep saying, why are we not acting like it? And I think one of the things that I'm hearing you say is that there's this weird split-screen we're living in right now where people are running around saying, this is really, really bad. This is an existential crisis. And then, you know, we go to a vote like we'll leave the chamber to vote on something. And I think that, that's the problem more even than the problem met identified, which is why are we only talking about crimes? It's that like it can't both be an existential catastrophe that the attorney general is perjuring himself before the committee, and that, like now we, you know, cut for a message from our sponsors, and, and we don't know how to talk. About catastrophes. And so we like sit in the makeup chair, and we talk about the law, and what you're saying is the level of whatever outrage fury drama should be commensurate with the problem. And that's a, that's a media problem. That's not a constitutional problem if that makes any sense, a media problem, that's why started media and also it had to do with the hearings, and you have to be able to get people's attention and make a moment to make a moment that people can understand easily. They understand that firing the head of investigation, and then getting your subordinates trying to get them. The fire the guy is not cooperating. They understand that. Do and it simple. And it's. It would get on TV it would be replayed, over and over again because there's no getting away from it. They have this problem where they think it's a crisis. They want to act like it's a crisis. The American public isn't quite there yet, and they're having a hard time figuring out how to get them there. I think they're getting there slowly the way to get done again. There is to start impeachment hearings. I have to say, I'm curious what you guys think about Nancy Pelosi's language of the president is impeaching himself. We don't have to impeach him because he self, impeaching like he's a self cleaning oven. What does that even mean what is does that just mean that it obviates responsibility for the house to do anything, you know what he's doing on precedent in with whole what he's withholding? You know, you can say, we're doing impeachment hearings, because the president is making us because he won't hand over the. Thing that every other president has handed over. So it's his fault. We're not impeaching him necessarily. We're having things that are called impeachment hearings, because he's being such a dick Polisi has a political problem to look, the, the thing about impeachment. Is this unique thing that is a quasi legal quasi political action, I think by any definition of on the legal side? If you look at the, the Nixon articles of impeachment of the Johnson articles of impeachment, clearly, what Trump has done justifies impeachment. If you just take the legal side of it, but on the political side of it, I don't know what Pelosi believes in her heart of hearts. I don't know what she believes is the smart thing to do. I do know that she runs a caucus. And in that caucus, there are whole bunch of members who don't only don't wanna impeach the president. They don't wanna talk about this at all. They come from more marginal district, some of them are freshmen, and they're making the political calculation rightly or wrongly, and I, I, I don't know whether the right or wrong that talking about impeach. And moving to impeachment hurts them. And as long as those members are in that place. It's very difficult for Pelosi to move forward. She could just roll them the sooner she moves forward the better if she's gonna move forward. That's true. Right. That's true. And so if you just say, the president is making us have what are called impeachment hearings, because he won't let Mcgann testify. He won't turn over material that other presidents every other president has turned over. He's making us do this. And then we have hearings were Don, Mcgann says. Yeah, he told he told me to write a memo and give it to the special counsel. That was a lie. Well, that's obstruction of Justice. That's ABC's action of Justice. And everybody knows it. And the American people know it, but you gotta hear it and you gotta have this is, you know, this is Butterfield as John dean a majority of people were not for impeaching Nixon before the Watergate hearings began. So this gets to the constitutional crisis question. Nixon didn't try to block those witnesses from going and testifying dean, obviously wanted to testify, but Nixon could have gone to court and tried to block him. I'm sure that would've been unsuccessful, but he tried. He didn't he didn't block those witnesses from coming testifying. We're in a different position now where this White House is blocking current employees, and former employees from going into desperate now. I wish Don Mcgann would have a little courage and just say, I'm going to testify, I don't care about the presence assertion of executive religion, he consuming and try to block me probably lose, but he's not doing that yet. It says chicken and egg problem. They have to get the American public to a place they aren't right now. But to get them to where they aren't right now they have to get some of these witnesses. And the only way to do that is to go to court, and it's gonna take time, which have you made the really good point. That, that's the problem is that we need television to make this happen, the drama of television. And you know, who's better at television than anybody? Donald trump. Yeah. But it is very effective to have Don Mcgann testifying. He's Republican as you get he told the truth to Muller's because he didn't wanna go to prison. So that's what he did. And so if he gets before the committee, he's got to tell the truth, and he will tell the truth, and that will be dramatic and enough of those and you've got yourself to really good TV. And so Donald Trump is really good at TV, but he you know, when he closed down the government he may have been good at TV people did not like that. They're not going to like, what they would here in these hearings. They were not for impeachment before the Senate Watergate hearings, which would obviously weren't impeachment. And they're in the Senate Archibald Cox wasn't appointed until after those hearings began. The Democrats have the house, they've gotta do this. Or you don't mean but if you don't shut up about it and start talking about infrastructure and healthcare. And look, if they don't do anything, if there's no sanction, for the president even something like censure, which doesn't really do anything to the president. But at least would for the for the historical record put the house on I. Of course if it's an impeachment that, that passes, the how, but you could say the same thing about impeachment. What does impeach him in the house? If it's gonna go nowhere in the Senate, actually do you could you could make the arguments, equally feckless. Here's the thing. Susan collins. I mean it puts them under pressure. Yeah, that's true. Yeah. And also we haven't found out. Yeah. The stone stuff is really bad. And we have this their stuff to uncover and stuff to see. That's why another reason you haven't invest, I completely agree. And the point I was making if there is no further investigation. If there's no sanction either impeachment that then fails in the Senate, or censure, or something, where Congress's on record, then basically, what it means that all of the president's behavior was okay by congress, and future presidents can interfere with investigations into themselves future presidents can call on their political opponents to be investigated as he did with Hillary Clinton. The point in the report about him asking Clinton to be investigated. That's not a crime. It's not -struction of Justice. I think it's impeachable offense if he gets away with it with no sanction, you're gonna see him do it again. And you may see future presidents do it because the thing about norms they change. And if he gets away with us than the new norm is the president can do that Muller's failure to whatever. The reason I know he did it because of the oil c- guidance, but the failure to take that last step and say, and therefore, this is obstruction is a way of saying, keep going. And now when Nancy Pelosi says, oh, it's he's not worth it. He's not worth impeachment. The only thing he hears from his end is that I've just been granted an even larger swath of power and behaviors than the, you know, the willingness to announce that we are ceding are checking functions because he's not worth it or because he's president all it does is reinforce the completely caddy one this worldview in which he's accountable to nobody the signaling around. Well, we're just not going to do this for whatever reason it has a real world effect on reinforcing, the idea that he's untouchable. Hey, buddy? You're listening to the Alf Rankin podcast and we're having great time here with Dahlia lick and Matt Miller. It's been just God. I'm enjoying this and I'm going to be in such a good mood. Enjoy my evening tonight, because this fun. I mean it really has hasn't it. Yeah. So that's why, but it's, it's great to talk about how we're screwed. And we have no way. It's why you have to do this thing, you know, who one of those president could be a second term on Trump. Let's force term is. That's right. Oh, but Al. Okay. So, okay. If I could say that, I think, so much of what's wrong that we keep looking to the courts to save us. And this was the problem for all the months that we looked to Muller to save us. And now we're like, okay. Well, Muller was completely ambiguous. So now we're looking to the courts and the courts are the worst situated institution to check Donald Trump. I mean for a million reasons, including the turtle reason why they have to have peach Mun hearings, and they can say, look, he's not handing stuff over. It's not us. It's doing he's, he's self impeaching. So that's what it means. So she's a genius. Yeah. I, I, I think you're exactly right about both. The courts won't save us Muller would save us. I don't think congress is gonna save at the end if we're saved, and we may not be scary to think it will probably be voters that said I think if, if I were running the judiciary committee right now and I were running the. House representatives, what I would do is, I would have subpoenas going pretty soon to all of the important witnesses in that report. So I could T up contempt votes and move into the courts quickly and I would make the argument that the old ways you've looked at this don't apply because you have one branch, that's not acting in good faith eater. And so you need to move up quicker because their entire strategy is based on you d'alene behaving the way you usually do. And hope that the courts don't give deference to the executive branch the way they usually do. And there's some precedent in, in the travel ban cases, the courts, didn't defer to the president initially the way that usually would because it was clear to them the way he was acting was not on the level. And he ultimately won. But that was on version three that was significantly different. So you hope that the courts step in more quickly move more quickly. And in the meantime, while that's working out, and that will have to work out to get any of these executive branch witnesses before the committee. So the mcgann's Donaldson's, I would have people like Corey Lewandowski, who's a key. Obstruction of Justice witness played in in. In the attempt to get sessions to recuse himself, I would have Corey Lewandowski before committee. And if you want to take the fifth he can take the fifth, I might immunize him and make him testify. I would call Donald Trump junior before the judiciary committee and make him testify again. It's a harder. Call to give him immunity. Muller, clearly didn't want to. But maybe I would and then I'd look at people like Rick gates and Mike. Flynn gates still cooperating on some things, but it with respect to the Russia, part of the investigation that is over. Mike Flynn is over except for his cooperation in, in this, unrelated Turkey case, there's no reason those people can appear and testify before house committee. So while we're playing out on the obstruction side to get all these White House witnesses hopefully eventually cleared by the courts. I go down the list of everyone else who wasn't executive branch employees and have have won a week before the house committee. Why wanna week find two three week whatever member salmon? Yeah. Okay. Jerry, nadler. Sammer. Jerry Nadler, Sammer, you know what I'm saying? Cool. He had a. Foghorn. Leghorn. We had this. I'm just a country. Right. And then we have Jerry Nadler, who's a very smart able. Boyer and chairman. But we need some drama 'em. But we can do exactly what you're talking about, and compel these people to testify if you do impeachment. Why are you guys just like ignoring me? I hear that's what I hear. I say and you go, yes, but you know what, don't you know, we're not going to do that. It's not a magic bullet. I'll be dollars, but moving impeachment is not a magic bullet that suddenly means Don Mcgann is before the test. The committee tomorrow, the president will still try to block his testimony in the courts. And but what I've heard the houses legal position, their legal argument is strengthened, if they haven't impeachment inquiry open, but doesn't necessarily mean the courts move any faster. I think that the question that I have I continue to have is forty what percent forty seven percent of Americans think Donald Trump committed crimes, and they don't care. And so I think what Nancy Pelosi is thinking to herself is this just doesn't matter. What if nothing you're saying changes anyone's mind? This is the difference between now and Watergate and out something you wrote about a lot before you were in the Senate is that there's this entire conservative media, you know, architecture on the other side. Now that just gives different news to different people, and there are enough Republicans who don't care, and I, I, I don't know what the tipping point would be that would make them care if they're hearing from FOX, that everything's hunky Dory, and his long as they're hearing from FOX. Everything's hunky Dory. Republicans in the house and Senate are going to behave that way. And so there's this fundamental question, I've, I've, I don't remember who I should ask it, which is, is Fox News had existed in the seventies with Nixon gone. Not sure the answer's yes. Okay. Well, that's a magical thought experiment, isn't it? Well, it's match sphere. But, but it know it applies where we are today because the answer so far. No. Yeah. Okay. Oh, we're out. Everybody but. Ellipoid. And all her great listen from amicus higher, buddy. Matt Miller, but I will see both on MSNBC along with a former federal prosecutor from the southern district of New York. So thank everybody where we are wherever you're listening to this have a good night, buddy. I actually think that's going to be a good show from late. Yeah. I think so too despair I kind of carries. That beautiful music is by Leo. Cocky, the greatly. Oh, coty. I wanna thank Auburn for producing this podcast. We'll talk again next week. And by we I mean me.

president Donald Trump Muller Nancy Pelosi attorney Matt Miller MSNBC Hillary Clinton Trump judiciary committee Senate Don Mcgann Minnesota United States vice president Roger stone congress Wisconsin special counsel
Thursday, July 25th, 2019

Up First

13:30 min | 1 year ago

Thursday, July 25th, 2019

"<music> Levin me didn't say the word impeachment yesterday but Republicans said it's what Democrats wanted this hearing. Today is their last best hope to build up some sort of ground swell across America to impeach President yesterday trump. I'm Noel King here with Rachel Martin and Mrs up I from N._P._R.. News one thing the hearings did make clear Muller believes election. Interference is still an urgent threat. What are the risks ahead of twenty twenty and protesters in Puerto Rico had their demands? They want governor row CEO to step down last night. They got what they wanted. Young with illegal Rosa says he'll be resigning effective August second demonstrators are celebrating but it's not clear who assumes leadership leadership now for the island stay with us. We'll give you the news you need to start your day support for this podcast. In the following message. Come from simplisafe home security simplisafe protects your whole home every window room mm-hmm and door with a round the clock professional monitoring and no long term contracts get free shipping on your order at simplisafe dot com slash up. I support also comes from Google from Connecticut's California from Mississippi to Minnesota Ota. Millions of businesses are using Google tools to grow online learn. How Google is supporting businesses in your state at Google dot com slash economic impact? He came he testified so what now former former special counsel Robert Muller took questions from Congress about his investigation into Russian interference during the two thousand sixteen election and about whether president trump obstructed justice for the most part yesterday Muller's answers were short and direct again and again he referred lawmakers is to the four hundred forty eight page report that his office issued earlier this year and still members of Congress pushed him to say what was in that report out loud. Here's the Democratic Chair of the House Judiciary Committee Jerry Nadler so the report did not include they did not commit obstruction of justice is accurate that is correct and what about total exoneration. Did you actually totally exonerate the president. No so that was the first hearing the second was before the House Intelligence Committee and focused specifically on Russian interference Republican will hurt of Texas asked Muller this in your investigation that you think that this was a single attempt by the Russians to get involved in our election or did you find evidence suggests. They'll try to do this again. Single attempt to they're doing is we sit here and they expected during the next campaign okay. So what did we learn from all this. What does it change? We're going to ask N._P._R.. Justice reported Ryan Lucas and N._p._R.. Political reporter Tim Mac they are both in our studios this morning the one that good morning so right I wanNA start with you. You were paying special attention to the judiciary hearing which focus on the issue of obstruction we heard that clip from Chairman Nadler there what Democrats want this hearing well what they wanted to do was zero in on a handful of episodes in Muller's report of the President trying to impede the investigation now those include the president directing his then White House Counsel Don began to fire Muller. The president directing began to then. been denied that he had been directed to fire Muller. A. Democrats knew that a lot of Americans didn't read Muller's report so what they wanted to do with this. I hearing in the question of obstruction of justice was highlight these specific episodes and bring them to life for the American in public but Robert Mueller wasn't having it. I mean he wouldn't even read out loud his own report so it ended up being this kind of awkward situation where the lawmakers themselves are forced to read it and then ask was that right right it was he was he was not a witness now. No one would accuse me of of of that <hes> he was definitely briefing his responses that forced Democrats as you said to read from the report themselves. Democrats did get one big point on the record from Muller though in that sort of exchange <hes> that we heard with with with Nadler that directly contradicts the mantra that we've heard from from trump of I was totally exonerated. Hearing Muller say this was not a total exoneration with something that Democrats wanted to get <hes> interestingly enough actually one exchange that has caught the eye of a lot of people came with a Republican Congressman Ken Buck of Colorado. Who'd you charge the president with a Trimbe after he left office? Yes you believe that he committed you could charge the president nine states with obstruction of justice after three left office. Now Muller's report basically says as much that if a president commits a crime he can be charged once he has left office and it's not specific it's not he wasn't saying president trump. There is evidence enough to to charge president trump with this crime rate leaves office. It was talking generally yeah all right so what about what about other Republicans I mean we just mentioned Ken but-but more holistically what was the Republican approach by and large they tried to do is what they did throughout the investigation undermine it so doubt about the integrity of the investigation and the investigators <hes> raise the same sort of allegations that we've heard for months that most team was politically biased that it was a witch hunt out to bring down trump muller knocked both of those down <hes> he said political affiliations played zero role in his hiring decisions. He said he wanted people who could get the job done quickly with integrity <hes> and he flatly denied that this was a witch hunting anyway all right to make let's turn this over to you. So the second hearings with the House Intelligence Committee more made it really clear in his report that Russia did it interfere in the two thousand sixteen election that has been established firmly. Did we learn anything new about that yesterday. So Muller was clear on how pressing an issue this was for U._S.. Intelligence and law enforcement agencies as we heard a little bit earlier he said that Russians were engaged aged disinformation right now as we sit here but he also added that other foreign actors are kind of spinning up their own operations and getting involved in the space disinformation is a low cost method to spend a lot of mayhem in the American democratic process and he says he fully expects the Russian government to take part in election interference again in twenty twenty in fact. He said they're doing it right now. As we sit here right <hes> so members of Congress what did they say to. What did they say about what Muller had to say about election security so there's been a big push by Senate Democrats in recent days and again after Muller's testimony to push Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to allow votes on bipartisan election security legislation as we've reported a lot about here on N._p._R.? Election. Insecurity is more than just ballot security right so lawmakers have proposed things like mandatory disclosures of foreign political ad buyers required reporting. If a foreign actors offer political information to campaign an automatic sanctions against any country. That's determined to to interfere with a U._S.. Election but so far McConnell has said that these measures are not necessary. Why Tim I mean what's the Republican resistance to something that both parties say yes? No Russia absolutely should not interfere in American election what McConnell in particular has pointed to the two thousand eighteen veterans and said Oh we did not see we've stepped up our game since two thousand sixteen law enforcement agencies and the intelligence community have the tools currently that they need to secure elections. It's not necessary to take additional legislative measures. So what else did you hear that struck you in the testimony especially from Republicans yesterday on this issue what Republicans reiterated that Muller didn't find sufficient evidence to charge a conspiracy between members of the trump campaign and Russia. Here's what House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devon Nunez had to say about that the Democrats have argued for nearly three years that evidence of collusion is hidden just around the corner like the Loch ness monster they insist it's there even if no one can find it so republicans even spent but some time questioning the link between the Russian government and the Russian troll farms that spread disinformation during the two thousand sixteen campaign even though that's been a well established fact affirmed by the intelligence community and members of the trump administration so it was notable Robert Muller didn't even say the word impeachment but it was so cute it was looming over everything yesterday did his testimony move that needle at all what to say the Democrats probably were hoping for the Muller test money to land with more impact than it did yesterday day a House Speaker Nancy Pelosi press conference after militia testimony and said they're still work to do before she's interested in going down the impeachment path but the investigations on the hill will continue in fact House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler says he's going to go to court today to enforce subpoenas to obtain mcgann's testimony and obtain the muller grand jury materials so it's over yet it goes on to continue at you're telling me <hes> N._p._R.'s Tim Mak an Ryan Lucas. Thanks you guys we appreciate it. Give and we've got some breaking news overnight. After twelve days of protests the governor of Puerto Rico Ricardo row CEO has resigned. That's right those demonstrations started after some really offensive texts that the governor exchanged with members of his inner circle were made public earlier this week grow CEO said he was going to stay in office but that he wouldn't seek reelection that was not enough. The protests kept going and then last night in a video statement on facebook the governor finally they said Okay enough glossy looking to Mente illiteracy weasel coined must altobelli will he said the call has been resounding and I have received with the highest degree of humility and here's David Welna is in San Juan covering bring all this <hes> so David. What else was was in that statement from Rodeo well Rachel? He said he had fully intended to serve out the two years that remain of his term in fact just a few days ago. He said he would do so but not seek. Seek reelection but now he saw that all he's accomplished so far he said could be damaged. If he remained in office. He did not mention the fact that Puerto Rico's congress was planning to begin impeachment proceedings against him this afternoon if he did not resign or that he'd been served with a search warrant this week and that many of his cabinet members as well as his chief of staff had already stepped down as for just when the governor will actually leave he said it will be next Friday August second and it's not clear how oh that delay is going to go over with all the people demanding that he leaves office immediately. It was really remarkable these protests demonstrations. It didn't really have a leader right. It was really grass roots kind of movement. What's been the reaction among demonstrators well well? They were victorious last night and they rejoice when the governor confirmed what had been rumored all day long yesterday that he had had a change of heart and had decided to step down. There was a lot of anxiety earlier in the evening when row CEO failed failed to make a promise announcement late afternoon and things looked like they could get nasty when squads of police in full riot gear appeared outside the fortresses the governor's palaces known but when it became official he's leaving people danced in the street and people honked car horns throughout the night are still haunting them celebrating. What really was a grassroots driven uprising that as you said had no clear leaders and no party affiliation either this is the first time in modern Puerto Rico history that a governor has resigned in and had he stayed it would have been the first impeachment undertaken by the Islands Congress? Things have been pretty tough here with tight austerity measures imposed to qualify for disaster systems promised by the U._S. Congress to help rebuild from Hurricane Maria and it just infuriated people to see their governor joking joking with his pails and insulting people in these online private chats that got leaked okay so speaking of no clear leader things are up in the air in terms of WHO's going to replace Rosaiah right yes because Puerto Rico has no lieutenant governor and the Secretary of the interiors the next next in line to replace Russilloshow but that's secretary resigned after those chats or relate and he has not been replaced so the next in line is the Secretary of Justice Wanda Vasquez and it would appear she'd fill this vacancy but she's widely seen here as tainted by her association with the Governor and could lack the legitimacy needed to do this job. People here are still planning to go head with street demonstrations this morning with more protests planned over the next few days. They'll they'll be celebrating Rosales resignation but they're they're lucky going to be demanding that someone else replace him. All right. N._p._R.'S DAVID WELNA reporting in San Juan the governor there in Puerto Rico has announced his resignation David. Thanks appreciate it. You're welcome <MUSIC> and that's up I for this Thursday July twenty fifth. I'm Rachel Martin and I'm will king would love it. If you start your day here with us tomorrow. You can subscribe to first wherever you listen to podcasts and it helps the show if you rate us in review us on Apple podcasts and and if you're ready for more N._p._R.. News did you know there's a radio show for the very thing you can find N._p._R.'s morning edition on your N._p._r.. Station at Stations Dot N._p._R.. Dot Org and for podcasts local news headlines Take N._P._R.. Everywhere you go with the N._p._R.. One you can find that a trap store Americans Kinda.

Robert Muller President Jerry Nadler Congress House Intelligence Committee Rachel Martin CEO Puerto Rico Russia Puerto Rico N._p._R. House Judiciary Committee Google Russian government Justice Noel King America Levin
The numbers are just staggering: Death toll rises in Sri Lanka

Post Reports

25:36 min | 2 years ago

The numbers are just staggering: Death toll rises in Sri Lanka

"The post reports podcast is sponsored by deep state and epix original series. Truth is a matter of perspective in this electrifying conspiracy series defeat returns, Sunday, April twenty eighth only on epochs get the channel or get the app. From the newsroom, the Washington Post. Is all about. Hi, Stephanie McDermott in the Washington Post. This is post reports I am routine powers. It's Tuesday, April twenty third. Today questions of responsibility after the bombings in Sri Lanka speaker Pelosi taps the brakes on impeachment and to Chinese blockbuster lands on Netflix. On Tuesday morning in Sri Lanka. The first. Mass burial was held for the victims of the bombing. That took place on Easter Sunday at least three hundred twenty one people are dead more than five hundred are injured the volume of the numbers of the victims. Are just are just staggering. Join us later is the India bureau chief for the post. Right now. She's in Colombo the capital free Lanka on Easter Sunday as Christians across Sri Lanka were gathering for mass. There were a series of coordinated explosions, they targeted three churches which were packed with people because it was Easter. They targeted three luxury hotels in Colombo later in the day. There were two other blasts. Also in Colombo and these were attacks that were carried out by suicide bombers. What do we know about who is responsible for this? The Sri Lankan government says that the attacks were carried out by an obscure local Islam ick, militant group with potential international assistance. The group is called he'd jemaat based in the eastern part of Sri Lanka. But it is never done anything like this before. And in fact, Sri Lanka's never really seen attacks like this targeting. Christians and foreigners before US intelligence. Does believe there are connections between this small local Sri Lankan group and these logic state, but it's not clear, whether those links are significant or operate we've been seeing reports about that. This may have been a form of retaliation for the attacks in New Zealand. Do we know that that is true? We don't know that that is true at this point. A minister in Sri Lanka's government said that the attack was a kind of retaliation for the shootings in Christ Church in New Zealand, but he didn't provide any evidence to back that up and SRI Lanka's Prime Minister was a little more circumspect when discussing the motive behind this attack or victory. New idea was that Deva for innings, and that this would not have been done just been raining you and applauding Asian which we are not seen. So in the past few days, we've seen some criticism of the Sri Lankan government that they may have had some warnings that this could have happened. What were those warnings? And why weren't officials paying attention to them? There is an intelligence report that was authored by a senior police official on April eleventh saying that there could be suicide attacks on popular churches within Sri Lanka by this. Obscure Islamist extremists group how that warning circulated which parts of tree Lanka's government knew about it and win is not entirely clear, but ministries have said that their security Skaff staff were aware of this warning aware of this intelligence report. So the question then becomes if they had this relatively specific intelligence. That these attacks were possible and the intelligence mentions the name of the group and the name of its leader and some of the names of its members. Why didn't they do more to stop it? And we don't have the answer to that question yet. The government also took some action right after these attacks to shutdown social media in the entire country, which is a pretty shocking step. Can you explain what led them to do that? And how that's been received. Yes. So the reason the government did this was in the hours after these devastating attacks. There was a lot of full. In inflammatory information, circulating on those platforms in the government was worried that that kind of information could spill over into violent reprisals in real life against certain communities or groups. So they took this step to just clamp down on social media entirely. I'd say that the people have spoken to here are not really upset or angry by the ban. They understand how dangerous certain kinds of information can be in certain situations. And this is, sir. Only a extraordinary situation for the country right now, what is the religious landscape of Sri Lanka. And is there a sense that that could have come into play with these with these attacks the religious landscape of she Lanka is predominantly Buddhist country, but it has significant communities of Hindus, Christians and Muslims. There are tensions between the religious communities. There have been threats on Christians attempts to disrupt masses in recent months. There have also been a tax on on Slim's at various points. But there's never been anything remotely like what we saw here on Sunday. So it's just such an anomaly for this country to have these kinds of terrorist attacks along religious lines that people are. Just in a state of shock. I've spoken to several people who said even during the civil war, there weren't attacks on churches, the churches always felt like a safe place. Is there if you're that there could be more attacks people here are very nervous, very tense. Authorities have said that there are others in this ring who are still at large and the thirties are pursuing them. So there's a sense that. Some violence is still possible. But we simply don't know. Join us later is the India bureau chief for the post. Just a few hours after the attacks. The Sri Lankan government worked with the country's phone companies to shut down access to social media sites. Tech policy. Reporter Tony Romm says that people in Sri Lanka end around the world are torn over whether it was the right call. Will. It certainly depends on who you ask. There's a camp who thinks that the Sri Lankan government actually made the right decision. This is a country that has struggled with misinformation online with ethnic tensions that are exacerbated by sites like Facebook, and the Sri Lankan government has been critical of Facebook in the past for not doing enough to address these problems in real time. But if you talk to some other organizations, like human rights advocates or free speech advocates, they fear that the set a dangerous precedent around the world that countries might look to using all out blocks and social media to address a problem that ultimately ends up causing more problems because people in Sri Lanka weren't able to go on Facebook or Twitter or YouTube to get accurate and timely. Mation about what was really happening on the ground, and they weren't able to use some of those services to reach out to love ones within the country or overseas. So there's a concern that there was a bit of blowback from Sri Lanka's decision, the shutdown access to social media. Even though there are some folks who think it might have stopped additional violence through the fact that took this really drastic step seem this reflective of a lot of attitudes from countries around the world about social media sites. Yeah. There's a lot of global frustration that Facebook and Google and Twitter and others just haven't done enough to stop the spread of bad stuff online. And it's more than just as information. It's hate speech. It's cyberbullying. It's threats to elections and so forth. And so while we're not talking about countries around the world trying to block social media. We certainly are talking about regulation. The UK has put forward a recent plan that would find companies if they don't take down militias content. Fast your pin unions considering the same. We saw actions in New Zealand and Australia after the attacks. In Christchurch New Zealand targeting to mosques, which the companies didn't do a good enough job of taking down violent video of that attack. So globally. I think there's this recognition that something has to be done to address social media to address the bad stuff that appears online. And you just have to consider the contrast from where we were ten years ago. We were talking about the power of Facebook and Twitter as organizing tools with respect to the spring about the usefulness of social media when it comes toppling, dictators and pushing the cause of democracy, and now we're having this conversation that maybe social media isn't actually all the good that we thought it was. Tony Romm covers tech policy for the post. Moeller talked about how he couldn't answer the question of obstruction of Justice, whether the president had obstructed Justice. There was some language in the report where he basically kicked to congress sort of laying out this case saying that he didn't think he had the ability to answer that question reach Baid is a congress reporter for the post she's been covering how the release of the mullahs report has plead out on Capitol Hill. Democrats on the hill. The first thing I was hearing in those frantic hours after four came out. They actually clicked that language and Senate around to reporters to sorta hold it up and say look Muller wants us to dig into this. And so the top takeaway right away was molar wanted us to do something. And we're going to do it. We don't know what it looks like we're going to do something some Democrats, including twenty twenty presidential candidates were calling for impeachment deserves to be. I think it would be perfectly reasonable. It's time for a lot of Democrats following the port felt. There was enough evidence in there that they could say the president obstructed Justice. They felt like he had at least done something very unethical if not committed a crime, and so normally, you know, if you feel like that it's a lawmaker impeachment is the next step. But at least one democratic leader is saying not so fast Nancy Pelosi who is speaker of the house. She has been very cautious on peach mint and worried that it would have some sort of blowback the way it did. When Republicans impeach Bill Clinton and the nineteen nineties and she wants to not only keep her house majority. She wants to help Democrats take out Trump in twenty twenty and install a democrat as president over the weekend. And on Monday night. We saw Pelosi sort of tap the breaks lightly on this notion of impeachment, even as Democrats some of them started to come out and say, it's time. So she had this conference call on Monday night with democratic congressional leadership. What did she say during this conference? Call the leaders spoke first privately for about fifteen minutes, and then they opened up the call to all House Democrats. So there were more than one hundred fifty Democrats on this call trying to figure out what is our next step in Pelosi's. Message to them was basically we're not going to start impeachment proceedings right now, we're gonna keep investigating and we'll see where it leads. But she did it in such a way that she was very gentle about it. I think she knows how this really divides her party in that. There's a lot of emotion surrounding this issue. She didn't say no flat out. It seems like she herself was sort of tiptoe around the issue knowing that it inspires a lot of passion with Democrats right now. So speaker Pelosi's trepidation about this. Is it a concern that by trying to impeach Trump? She would end up galvanizing his base, or why is she so weary about this process? That's exactly right. And I think Trump allies say the same thing, you know, Republicans privately have been hoping that Democrats take up in peach mint suppose, very concerned about that. And one sort of threshold she laid out early in the process before the mole report came. Out was that any appeasement needs to be bipartisan, the Republicans, obviously control the Senate and the house has the ability to impeach. But then it goes to the Senate for trial in only the Senate can remove, but after the mole report we saw maybe two senators put out statements sort of chastising, the president Mitt Romney was one of them. But even then even as Mitt Romney said he was sickened by what he was reading and how the president had acted. He didn't say anything about impeachment. And he actually said he was glad that no charges were filed. So right now that bar partisan support is not there at the same time. We're seeing a lot of Democrats including twenty twenty years like Elizabeth Warren, some of even Pelosi's own chairs, Maxine Waters, for instance, who is a democrat from California who chairs the House Financial Services committee. Put out a statement that said, you know, Democrats would be derelict in their duty. If they don't do this. There's a concern about which sort of precedent it sets going forward and. And you know, if they don't impeach our they basically green-lighting president or future candidate to welcome. The support of a foreign adversary meddling, our elections as Muller said Trump's team did Democrats are worried about you know, what does it say? If they say nothing does it make them complacent. And anyway, so as these congressional investigations continue if they do end up deciding that they want to pursue impeachment. What would that process look like with impeachment? The idea was that basically each committee looks into something, and they have numerous charges that they would bring on the president abuse of power public corruption trying to upend an investigation different scandals that each committee would try to unearth, and then they would put together some sort of document that would then become the basis for impeachment and theoretical document would go beyond the bounds of the. A report that was just laying Russian interference. This would include a lot of other potential presidential wrongdoings if they were to find them. That's exactly right house oversight committee is looking at the president and his instruction to give certain people security clearances, even though officials who worked in the office didn't think certain people should have them for national security reasons. So yes way beyond just the Miller report. And so they would put out a document, and then bring it to the floor, and that's sort of how it would proceed, and then how would the actual process of impeachment work to after they have these articles of impeachment and Mark them up and write them in the House Judiciary committee, which hasn't peach jurisdiction. It would go to the house floor, and then it would be voted on. And should it pass the house? It would then be carried over to the Senate. And for my understanding, there's actually like some sort of ceremony where they carry the document from the house to the Senate and the Senate they can't ignore it. You know, a lot of times we have bills that passed the House Democratic house in. Republican Senate just never takes it up. They just ignore it. And they let it die but on impeachment. It's privileged. So it would force the Senate to take it up in the Senate would be the one to carry out a trial. And when you say that this also falls to Senate Republicans, and whether there's any desire there to impeach the president that it's because the Senate is ultimately the body that will determine whether or not he is removed from office. That's right. No, president has ever been removed from office. So it takes two thirds of the Senate to do that that's very high threshold. That's going to be a lot of Republicans that would have to join with Democrats one of the arguments that I've heard about a reason for Democrats to be weary of impeachment were of an impeachment process is that it would just take so long rate, and my son was that if they were to pursue this. It would just keep going through twenty twenty up until the election and would end up being a big distraction. But then when you look at how impeachment proceedings went down for President Clinton it actually. From start to finish was less than six months. Is that that argument that this would be a huge distraction up until the presidential election and Democrats should have their attention. Elsewhere. Do you think that argument hold water? You know, he realized the headlines you turn on your TV and watch cable news and a lot of whenever this stuff is happening it dominates Democrats. They want to keep their focus on things like health care on pocketbook issues that they actually flipped the house on whether it's protecting existing conditions increasing minimum wage, if they do this on the campaign trail, it's going to be Trump, Trump, Trump Muller Muller Muller. And that is exactly the fear that Pelosi and a lot of these members from moderate districts in the house have in that their message will not break through on what they are trying to do for their voters. So in the meantime, as these congressional investigations continue what is the status of how they're going and what they're looking at. To be honest. There are so many things are looking at it's hard to keep track. I've joked that I'm gonna make like a flow chart with all the deadlines and all the different investigations or try to do placate myself. Clone myself in some way, but I would expect the judiciary committee announced yesterday that they're going to bring in Don Mcgann, he was a central witness for molar in laying out potential obstruction. Don Mcgann is the former counsel for Trump White House counsel. And he was the person that Trump told to get Muller fired get rid of molar any said, no the Democrats want to hear from him. And I would expect that all the big names that came out in the report, the Democrats will be reaching out to them in some way, shape or form trying to bring them in for public testimony. And this is again, this sort of strategy that they are coalescing around to if not impeaching highlight all the dirty laundry, you know, air that early laundry out. And so they'll bring people in they'll have them tell their stories publicly. And they'll sort of they're hoping voters will see that. And they could use that against the president and twenty twenty it seems like a strategy of just throwing a lot of things against the wall. And seeing what sticks and trying to assess options of either you find you find on the president that you can use for an impeachment or you find it on the president that you can use during the campaign, but that either way these investigations can serve either of those purposes. That's right. And one thing of note is that they're going even before his presidency to sort of show voters. You know, why would you wanna vote again for a man who lied to a Bank about how much his personal wealth was to try to game the system to his benefit? Why would you wanna back somebody who tried to avoid taxes they're asking for his tax returns? And this is what they think these documents will show, obviously, we don't know because we haven't seen them. But this is all part of that strategy. Rachel. Thank you so much. Thank you. Rachel Baid is a congress reporter for the post. And now one more thing totally would teach you what you want you to Hinch. The wandering earth. China's first Sifi blockbuster, and it's earned nearly seven hundred million dollars in worldwide sales now net flicks has picked up the film and the releasing the movie online next week. Wandering earth is a major science fiction spectacle that has gotten huge amounts of attention in China. Hi, my name is an Kokusai an assistant professor of media studies at the university of Virginia, and the author of the book would made in China and says that the wandering earth is a huge achievement for China's movie industry and for its coverage. Fought flabby sequel. The film takes place in the near future. When the sun is turning into a red giant and in order to survive, the people of earth have to find a strategy for being able to escape the glowing incredibly heating, son, countries and regions around the world. To construct ten thousand. What happens is people earth decide to actually propel earth to a different solar system. That's where the name comes from the wandering earth. Now in the process of propelling the earth to a different solar system earth get sucked into the gravity of Jupiter. So rag tag group of Chinese scientists and Chinese teenagers come together saving the entire earth from crashing into Jupiter. Notion. The are. You now one of the things that's really know where the here is that there is something called the United earth government that makes decisions, but it's very clear that the Chinese partners are leaders within the United earth government. We do hear people speaking English. But there is no mention of the United States. The Chinese government has been focusing a lot of attention on trying to build global Chinese blockbusters. The last big Chinese-language blockbuster was almost twenty years ago with crouching tiger hidden driving. China for a long time was focused on building its manufacturing economy, which is a comparatively low value industry. So now, the big focus for industrial development is moving up the value chain, so things that require more creativity. More high technology and film is one of those strategic industries. Another part is trying to expand China's soft power and its influence around the world. And Kokusai is an assistant professor at the university of Virginia. That's it for today show. Thanks for listening. You can learn more about the stories on our show by going to post reports dot com on the conversation on Twitter by tagging me at Martine powers or using the hashtag post reports. I'm Martine powers. We'll be back tomorrow with more stories from the Washington Post. This post reports podcast is brought to you by deep state and epix original series. Don't miss this electrifying conspiracy series when it returned Sunday. April twenty eighth only on.

Democrats Sri Lanka president Senate Nancy Pelosi Lanka Washington Post Trump government Twitter President Clinton Facebook China Muller reporter New Zealand
It's Robert Time!

Today, Explained

21:49 min | 2 years ago

It's Robert Time!

"Hello. Fresh makes conquering the kitchen a reality with deliciously, simple recipes and fresh premeasured ingredients delivered to your door right now, you get eighty dollars off your first month of hellofresh, go to hellofresh dot com slash explained eighty and enter the code explained eighty that has hellofresh dot com slash explained eight zero. The Justice department has just appointed a special counsel to lead a new investigation into Russian influence in the election. The department naming former FBI chief Robert Muller as special counsellor, Paul Manafort, former Trump campaign chairman is now a criminal defendant national security adviser, Michael Flynn says that he is cooperating with the special counsel's probe thirteen Russians and three Russian companies interfered online and in person in the two thousand sixteen election. Michael Collins offices were raided by the FBI for reasons unknown at this time. The jury found Poelman afford guilty of intentionally dodging taxes on millions of dollars. Jeff Sessions is now out as general. President Trump's former Laura Michael Cohen has pleaded guilty to line to congress about his contacts with Russian. The department of Justice will also make the report available to the American people half ter- it has been delivered to congress. Andrew Procup Muller reporter, vox, it's finally here in redacted form. What does it say? So the mullahs report is divided into two main parts the first is about Russian interference in the election. And the second is about whether President Trump obstructed Justice. And this is where we were the last time we talked that time we just had a four page summary. This time we have a four hundred odd page report. So what does it say specifically starting with the rush investigation collusion Muller makes it very clear that there was a Russian effort to interfere with the election. It relates to the two main areas where he has already filed charges against various Russian nationals. The first of these areas is the social media propaganda effort and the other area is the hacking and leaking of Democrats emails so Miller starts off. I saying yes, Russia did interfere in these two main ways. However Muller did not establish any conspiracy between Trump associates and the Russian government on either of these two fronts the social media propaganda or the hacking of the emails. What does the report say about the link between Trump associates and the Russian government, specifically Muller writes, although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts. The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities. So basically Russia wanted Trump to be president and tried to make it happen. The Trump campaign was happy to get Russian help. But the two never really met. There was no deal cut or at least not enough evidence to establish such a deal being cut between Russia and the Trump campaign pointing out a really get as the report says that when former attorney general Jeff Sessions told Trump that Muller had been appointed on may seventeenth twenty seventeen. Trump reportedly responded quote, oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my presidency. I'm fucked. Yes. And quote, why would you say that unless you did something very very bad Muller writes at one point the evidence does indicate that a thorough FBI investigation would uncover facts about the campaign and the president personally that the president could have understood to be crimes or that would give rise to personal and political concerns. Basically Muller thinks that even if there was no conspiracy between. Trump and Russia. He had ample other reasons to really want to try and stop this investigation in its tracks. And I guess that's where the obstruction comes in. What did we learn from this report about how much the president himself may have tried to obstruct? The investigation obstruct Justice. This second half of the report describes ten different episodes in which Trump while president may have attempted to obstruct Justice by interfering with the Russia investigation. Essentially these include things like his firing of James Komi, his efforts to stop Komi from investigating Michael Flynn. And also various other things that we've heard less about for for instance, an effort to push out Muller himself and effort to get his former campaign manager Corey Lewin, douse key to try to tell Jeff Sessions to rein in Muller's investigation. So muller. Goes over what the facts show on all of these topics. Yeah. But he does not make up his mind one way or the other whether this amounted to criminal conduct and he says that one of the big reasons why he decided not to make that call is that Trump is the president. And the Justice department has held that you can't prosecute a sitting president. So the gist of a lot of this is that Muller is trying to lay out the facts of what happened here without going so far as to say, this was criminal obstruction of Justice. Or this wasn't criminal obstruction of Justice. And what does he say about what the president directed others to do to maybe slow this investigation down or make it go way? There's a good quote here. Where Muller writes that the president's efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful. But that is largely because the persons who surrounded the president declined to. Out orders or exceed to his requests. In other words, Trump kept telling his subordinates to interfere with investigations or to fire people or to shut down various lines of inquiry and those people around Trump kept not doing it. This is why he's not charging any of Trump's aides with obstruction of Justice. Because essentially, they just didn't do what Trump told them to do. It's a little confusing. Right. He's saying Trump wanted people around him to commit obstruction of Justice. And he's done a bunch of things that seem very much like obstruction of Justice. But he's still not saying that this is definitely obstruction? It is confusing and there have been questions about why Muller chose this approach. Exactly Muller makes it clear again. And again that he is definitively not exonerating. Trump Muller writes, if we had conference. Silence. After a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of Justice. We would so state based on the facts, and the applicable legal standards. We are unable to reach that judgment accordingly. While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him congress, which has the responsibility for potentially impeaching president. And of course, the American public can kind of make up their minds for themselves. How much of the report was redacted? And do we know why what was redacted was redacted? So there are some significant reductions each redaction is identified with justification. But there are four main categories of that I is grand jury material second is material that relates to ongoing investigations third is material that could compromise intelligence sources and methods. And fourth is material that could compromise the privacy interests of peripheral third parties. So there, you know, black bars some whole pages are blacked out. Sometimes it's just certain words or phrases. And some of these do appear to be important. Roger stone is facing a trial that in part relates to what he has said about his efforts to get in touch with WikiLeaks regarding the stolen democratic emails that were hacked by Russia because of this pending trial. The government is under an obligation not to disclose material that could prejudice the outcome in that trial. So a lot of the stuff about Roger stone in here is completely blacked out. And that includes whether any Trump people worked with WikiLeaks or had come into contact with the hacked emails before they became public that really isn't resolved here. A lot of that is blacked out. Democrats want Robert Muller to come testify might. We learn more about this. If that happens or from the hearings that could follow the Justice department is going to provide a version of the report with fewer reductions to congress in private and let them look at it. So we may learn through leaks about more stuff that's redacted in the public version Muller did not appear at bars press conference about the report today, and there is no sign that he has any plans to speak about this anytime soon Democrats on the hill, certainly want him to testify, but it's unclear whether that will happen you've been reporting on this for for two years. And today you finally got to touch the thing read the thing. What did you make of what you saw all of this obstruction stuff looks pretty bad. Trump pretty clearly attempted to interfere with this investigation again. And again, and again, and it didn't in the end work. So far as we know the investigation continued, and it did reach a conclusion. But it does tell us something that the president of the United States is is someone who's willing to keep trying to use his power in this way to try to impede an investigation into people around him and eventually himself. She'd never happen to another president again this hoax that should never happen to another president again. Thank you. I ask as recline. What all this means for the presidency and the country after break. When I got home from work. There was a box waiting for me on my stoop there. It said Hello on it it came from hellofresh. The box had a convenient warning said don't panic. Your ingredients are safe, but this box is upside down, I found that very helpful. It also said this box is one hundred percent recyclable, which I liked. I hope it gets recycled cracked open the box and found three recipes cream, mushroom ravioli, grilled cheese and veggie jumbled green pepper and black olive flat. Breads, I brought them the work me just in case. Hellofresh wants to know that they make conquering the kitchen and reality. So if you've never conquered it, now's the time, the meals come together and thirty minutes, max, call for less than two pots, and pans, and don't require a lot of cleanup. And right now, you get eighty dollars off your first month of hellofresh. When you go to hellofresh dot com slash explained eight zero and enter the code explained eight zero that is hellofresh dot com slash explained eighty and enter the code explained eighty for twenty dollars off. I four. Oxes which is to say eighty dollars off your first month. As reclined before we had a chance to even read. This report today William Barr told us what to think about it. Why did he do that? I think are three ways to read that press conference. One of them is at the audience is Donald Trump himself, Donald Trump as you will freed if you read this report is very into his subordinates spinning for him and defending him and protecting him. So William bar goes out for anybody else has publicly seen the report. Although not by the way, before the Trump administration seen the report, and he goes out and gives an extremely protective of Trump summary. President Trump faced unprecedented situation as he entered into office and sought to perform his responsibilities as president federal agents and prosecutors were scrutinizing his conduct before and after taking office and the conduct of some of his associates, but the other thing, and this is a classic way of exploiting a weakness in the press is that what bar was trying to do with. He was creating visual clips that the news would run all day. There was an hour. So between his press conference in one report actually came out. So during that period, all that was really being run was clips of him talking and then people talking about him. And then of course, those run on the nightly news too. I think that his spin on the report was so friendly to Trump, and then the report was so much more mixed than that, shall we say that it might ultimately backfire yet. How does what bar said in his summary weeks ago and this morning lineup with what we read in the actual report almost wanna pull out of all the summaries and all the talking like what if you just woke up like rip van winkle and just read this report? And what I would submit is that it is incredibly damning, it is actually shocking to read it all stacked up one after the other after the other after the other I would say that the big picture story that is being told here, and then you can decide how you feel about that story has a couple parts one. And this is literally the second sentence of the report is that Russia had a sweeping and massive. Operation to influence, a twenty sixteen election in Donald Trump's favor. Right. The Trump campaign believed that would benefit them. They also by the way during this period. The Trump organization was in talks to open up a Trump Moscow. This one on for much longer than Donald Trump admitted on well into 2016 ending this period. There was some advance warning for Trump associates of the WikiLeak cats, the Tele Clinton emails, so all that. Then there is this obstruction peace and the obstruction is much more damning than I thought I'm somebody who came into this thinking Donald Trump had destructed Justice just given what we had seen it fire James Comey. I mean, there's a lot those in the public record there. But when you read the part of Mola's report, what he is saying, I would argue this is a fair summary is that they believed Trump is obstructed Justice. And they do not believe it is proper them to make that judgment. They say get and again that if they thought he had not they would say that they say that they're not making a traditional prosecutorial judgement. But they think it is fair for congress to make. Judgments about whether or not the president has overstepped his boundaries here. And they offered ten different instances where they say there is a plausible case that one might one investigate about whether or not obstruction was done. And they offer a lot of evidence about what happened if the most damning thing in this report is the obstruction of Justice that that Muller saw from Trump and his subordinates. Does it matter if William bars hardy cleared, the president on obstruction of Justice? I mean matters a hard word here. So what matters whatever what what was ever going to matter here? There was never a chance not a real one that Republicans in the Senate we're going to vote to impeach Donald Trump. Right. So the idea that this was going to lead to impeachment. I've said this for a long time has been fanciful. So what is matter mean, it matters that we know this it matters. We have a better record the investigations that are going to come from this right house. Democrats are gonna launch many investigations coming out of this report will matter at least again. In terms of getting us, more information. But then there are two questions in terms of weather matters in terms of political consequences. One is whether or not anything in the report or any investigation stemming from the port lead to some kind of congressional action against Trump bright impeachment is fundamentally a political decision. It is a political consequence. And then there's the question of the election. And does it matter in the way people assess Trump, and you know, what I'll be honest, I'm inclined to think that neither one of those are going to be a way in which this matters. I think people's minds on this very made up. We did not see much change in polling around this after bars initial summary. And I don't think we're gonna see huge change after this. And similarly while I think Democrats will investigate a lot by the time of investigations are really bearing fruit. I think we're gonna be so deep into twenty twenty. They're not gonna wanna launch those kinds of proceedings and one last point on this another way should matter. There's a lot of information here on Russia trying to hack among other things election systems, they appear to have in fact taken over the computers at least one Florida county. Now, I'm not saying. They change the results of the election in that way. I don't see evidence of that. But among other things we could do a lot to hardened security both for political actors, and for our actual election systems against notches Russia, but other foreign incursions, and that is another thing here that worries me talking about our next election that isn't that far away. I wonder, you know, hearing William Barr this morning stressing the point to say that this is unprecedented. What exactly is the precedent that we now have that special counsel? Robert Muller lists out ten instances of obstruction, and nothing might come of it. What does that mean for the expansion of executive power in an executive privilege because if feels like what this amounts to is saying, here's what the president can get away with. When I look at the history of the past couple of years and the Muller investigation is part. But not all of this argument. What I see is a political system in which it is clear that our methods of accountability are broken the true methods of accountability. Mechanisms of accountability, we have our functionally partisan don't think anybody believes the Republican congress would have treated something similar the same way. If it had been about Brock Obama or Hillary Clinton, they will work or arguably will work, although they can also be overused. If the congress, particularly is controlled by the opposition party, and they will fail if it is controlled by the president's party, but Trump is the the leader of his party. And he's out there today after he's received reports saying what an injustice investigation was as if all these people in his orbit weren't indicted or charged as if Muller didn't produce ten potential examples of obstruction? Of Justice, one of the things it has been striking to me about the administration spin on this is it even if you take the very generous view of the president's motivations. It's quite damning. So what William bar said this morning, and what the report says in different ways throughout it is that Donald Trump was just so angry. He was so mad that this investigation was going on. And it might cast doubt on the legitimacy of his election, or it might distract other parts of his presidency the began to engage all these other behaviors and the implication of that from Barr, and others is it's all understandable that. Yeah. Maybe he did kind of obstruct Justice in li- Allott and try to fire people who are looking into what Russia had done whether or not there have been connections to the Trump campaign when they were doing it. But it's understandable because he was really upset and this idea that Donald Trump took a foreign governments attack on America's political system turned it in and his own head to a transactional. Benefit for him. And then took any effort. Figure out what had gone wrong, and what had happened as an attack on him that he had to defend against that's quite damning. I mean, when you're president of the United States, you're not just you. You're not just like a competitor on some political reality show. You're the president you represent this country. Even the parts of it that didn't vote for you. And Donald Trump's consistent inability to conceive of himself in that larger role is one of the true ways in which he has been too small and too narrow for this job. As reclined hosts, the Ezra Klein show from FOX. I'm Sean Robbins firm. This is today explained. Before we go one last note about hellofresh. They got a bunch of different options to choose from classic veggie family. Leave even got a mother's day box for you. There's a mother's day brunch. There's a mother's day dinner limited time boxes, y'all. Eighty dollars off your first month of hellofresh. Hellofresh dot com slash explained eight zero enter the code explained eight zero.

President Trump president Robert Muller Trump Trump associates Russia Justice department Democrats Andrew Procup Muller Russian government hellofresh congress William Barr FBI Jeff Sessions Roger stone special counsel Muller United States