Jack - Mueller Report Pt. 17

Episode Date: September 13, 2019

Welcome to part 17 of our special coverage of the redacted Mueller report. Today we will be covering volume two, sections I and J pages 113 to 133.

Welcome to Teacher Quit Talk, I'm Miss Redacted, and I'm Mrs. Frazzled. Every week we explore the teacher- Exodus to find out what if anything could get these educators back in the classroom. We've all had our moments where we thought, what the hell am I doing here? From burnout to bureaucracy to soul-sucking stressors and creative dead ends, from recognizing when it was time to go, to navigating feelings of guilt and regret afterwards, we're here to cut off a gaslighting and get real about what it means to leave teaching. We've got insights from former teachers from all over the country who have seen it all. So get ready to be disturbed.

Join us on teacher quit talk to laugh through the pain of the US education system. We'll see you there. Thanks to clutter for supporting Mollershoe Road. When it comes to making life easier, clutter is the undefeated champ. Their on-demand experience takes the self out of self storage. Clutter has a great sign-up bonus. Get $50 off your first month when you sign up at clutter.com-ag and use code-ag at checkout.

And thanks to Zipper Cruder for supporting Mueller's She Wrote. Hiring is challenging, but there's one place you can go where hiring is simple, fast, and smart. A place where growing businesses can connect to qualified candidates, and that place is zippercruder.com-ag. So to be clear, Mr. Trump has no financial relationships with any Russian oligarchs. That's what he said. That's what I said. That's obviously what the opposition is.

I'm not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I didn't have and I have communications with the Russians. What do I have to get involved with Putin for having nothing to do with Putin? I've never spoken to him. I don't know anything about a mother than he will respect me. Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. So, it is political. You're a Communist! No, Mr. Green. Communism is just a red herring.

Like all members of the oldest profession I'm a capitalist. Hello and welcome to Muller She Wrote and our special coverage of the redacted Mueller report. I'm your host A.G. and with me as always are Julie Sejansson. Hello. And Jordan Coburn. Hello. How you guys doing? Good, good, good. Sweet. Yes. All right. Today we're gonna cover volume two sections I and J pages 113 to 133 so pause and read. Okay, welcome back. So section I covers Trump ordering McGann to deny that he tried to fire Mueller. And Section J is about Trump's conduct toward Flynn, Manafort, and a redacted name, which I believe to be Roger Stone, because it's redacted for harm to an ongoing matter. And Stone's trial doesn't begin until November 5th.

And right now, we're in the September 12th timeframe of 2019. So just so you know, when you're listening 20 years from now, and when we're on some MSNBC documentary, you have the dates. Yes, we're two months away now from his trial. Yes. So let's kick this off with the evidence that Trump directed McGann to lie about his attempts to fire Mueller with Section I of the evidence

on page 113, beginning with the press reporting, that Trump tried to fire the special counsel, that's Subsection one. And on January 25th, 2018, the New York Times reported that in June 2017, the president ordered McGann to have the Department of Justice fire Mueller. According to the article, quote, amid the first wave of news media reports that Mr. Mueller was examining the possible obstruction case, the president began to argue that Mr. Mueller had three conflicts of interest that disqualified him from overseeing the investigation.

Unquote. The article further reported that after receiving the president's order to fire Mr. Mueller had three conflicts of interest that disqualified him from overseeing the investigation." The article further reported that after receiving the president's order to fire Mr. Mueller, White House counsel Don McGann, refused to ask the Justice Department to dismiss the special counsel, saying he would quit instead. The article stated that the president ultimately backed down after the White House counsel threatened to resign rather than carry out the directive. And Trump dismissed that news as fake. And then that's one way to put it. Trump dismissed that news as fake.

I love Mueller. He's like, I take your question. Trump said it was fake. The next day, the Washington Post reported on the same stuff, but they added that McGann had not told the president directly that he intended to resign, rather than carry out the directive to have special counsel terminated. In that respect, the post-story clarified the time story, which could be read to suggest that McGann had told President directly that he intended to resign rather than carry out the directive to have special counsel terminated.

And that respect the post story clarified the time story which could be read to suggest that McGann had told the president of his intention to quit, causing the president to back down from the order to have special counsel fired. So those are the two conflicting stories from the times in the post. On to subsection two about Trump trying to have McGann publicly dispute the press reports. Both of them. On January 26th, 2018, the president's personal lawyer called McGann's attorney and said that the president wanted McGann

to put out a statement denying he had been asked to fire a muller and that he threatened to quit in protest. McGann's attorney spoke to McGann and then called Trump's lawyer back to say he wasn't going to do that because the time story was accurate. My God. Hicks recalled telling Trump that one of his attorneys had spoken to McGann's attorney about the issue.

So I hope Hicks backed that up. They had spoken about the reporting and McGann told her the article was accurate and he was going to refute it. So now we've got a couple people saying that McGann said the New York Times article was correct. The following week, previous appeared on Meet the Press and said he didn't recall Trump ever saying he wanted to fire Mueller. Trump called him up and told him good job. And then I never said any of those things about special counsel. On February 5, 2018, Trump complained about the Times article to Rob Porter saying the

article was bullshit. Trump said that again, that's it says that in the report bullshit. That's not my little, you know, flare. Trump said that McGahn, it says that in the report bullshit. That's not my little flair. Trump said that McGann leaked to the media to make himself look good. The president then directed Porter to tell McGann to create a record to make it clear that the president never directed McGann to fire the special counsel. Porter thought the matter should be handled by the White House Communications Office, but the president said he wanted McGann to write a letter to the file for our records and wanted something beyond a press statement to demonstrate that the reporting was inaccurate. President said he wanted McGand to write a letter to the file for our records and

Wanted something beyond a press statement to demonstrate that the reporting was inaccurate The president referred to McGand as a lying bastard and said that he wanted a record from him Porter recalled Trump saying something to the effect of if he doesn't write the letter, maybe I have to let him go Hmm. Oh my god, and at this point in the report of course, it's been confirmed He 100% asked McGann to fire Mueller. Yes, but he didn't use the word fire and we'll get into that. The next day, February 6th, Kelly scheduled time for McGann to meet with him and the president in the Oval Office to discuss the Times article. The morning of the meeting, the president's personal counsel called McGann's attorney and said the president was going to be speaking with McGahn and McGahn could not resign no matter what happened in the meeting. Weird. And then the president began the Oval Office meeting by telling McGahn that the New York Times story didn't look good. Now that it was fake, she didn't look good. I'm not a friggin reporter dude take it up with them. And McGahn needed

to correct it. McGahn called the, recalled the president said, I never said to fire Mueller. I never said fire. The story doesn't look good. never said to fire Mueller. I never said fire. The story doesn't look good. You need to correct this. You're the White House counsel. And in response, McGann acknowledged that he had not told Trump directly that he planned to resign, but that the story was otherwise accurate. Um, so now McGann is refuting the New York Times report that he told Trump directly.

He was going to resign, but he didn't tell him that directly. The president, but the president did say, I have his lawyer, Call McGann, and say, no matter what, he can't resign during this meeting. So the president asked McGann, did I say the word fire? And McGann responded, what you said was, call Rod Rosenstein,

tell Rod that Mueller has conflicts and can't be the special counsel. The president responded, and he never said that. Trump then said he merely wanted McGann to raise the conflict's issues with Rosenstein and leave it to him to decide what to do. McGahn told the president he did not understand the conversation that way, and instead he

heard, call Rod, there's conflicts, Mueller has to go. The president asked McGahn whether he would do a correction, and McGahn said no. And McGahn thought the president was testing his metal to see how, you know, committed McGahn was to what happened. Kelly described the meeting as a little tense. Oh yeah, this is a little tense. The president also asked McGahn, sorry I just had a little tense view of my head, you know how dudes pitch a tent. Oh, like camping is intense. Yeah, that kind of kind of. I'm sure it's cute. I love that stuff. Little tense. The president also asked McGahn why he told Mueller's team that the president had told him to

have the special counsel removed. McGann responded he had to and that his conversations with the president were not protected by attorney client privilege. The president then asked, what about these notes? Why do you take notes? Lawyers don't take notes. I've never had a lawyer who took notes. It's shady as fuck fuck only voice recordings and again and again responded he keeps notes because he's a real lawyer and explain that

notes create a record and they're not a bad thing the president then said i've got a lot of great lawyers like roikon he didn't take notes he was totally despired uh... after after the obel office meeting uh... concluded kelly recalled mcgan telling him that he and Trump did have that conversation. McGann recalled that Kelly said that he pointed out to that to the president after the obel office that McGann had not backed down and would not budge following the meeting.

And Trump's lawyer then right after the meeting called McGann's lawyer, Trump's lawyer called McGann's lawyer, and relayed that the president was fine with McGann's lawyer, Trump's lawyer called McGann's lawyer, and related the president was fine with McGann. So that is sort of the evidence about this whole creating a false document, you know, pressuring McGann and McGann was going to quit. But apparently what he's establishing here is that McGann didn't directly tell the president he was going to resign because of this, but the president knew. And I think we'll find that out when we go over the analysis of the evidence as soon as we're back From a quick word from our sponsor

Whether you're getting ready to move spring cleaning or Marie condoing your life Which I'm doing because summer is now over you're probably a lot like me You're looking to free up a lot of valuable space. I do not like clutter So self-storage is always an option But what if there was a way to store your stuff without breaking your back, moving stuff, trying to remember where it all is, or spending a fortune on it? And that's where clutter comes in. Clutter is the world's largest on-demand storage provider, and I'm all about convenience. You know this about me by now. I don't think I'm lazy. I'm an efficiency enthusiast. And when it comes to making my life easier, clutter is really the best.

So finding an affordable place to stash your things has never been simpler, so you can just sit back, relax, and let clutter do the heavy lifting. So here's how it works. For a low monthly rate, clutter will schedule a pickup time, they'll show up, they'll pack your stuff, they'll move your stuff to storage, they'll keep a photo inventory so you can see exactly what you have in storage, and if you ever need to to retrieve anything you don't have to drive down there to your storage locker You don't have to dig through all your stuff hoping it's there because you have that photo inventory You know exactly where it is and you can just contact clutter and they'll deliver it right to your door in 48 hours or less

And that's part of your monthly fee. You don't pay for packing you don't pay for delivery and they have a price match guarantee So you'll always get the lowest storage rate, which is awesome. Clutter is the world's largest full service on-demand storage experience, and they do all the work for you. So stop wasting time, stop wasting money, and stop vetting storage facilities,

and experience the future of storage with Clutter. And they have a great sign-up bonus for our listeners. Get $50 off your first month when you sign up at clutter.com slash AG. That's on top of Clutter's already no hassle moving online inventory management, free pickup and delivery, price match guarantee, everything. It's on top of that. So see why clutter is better and get $50 off your first month at clutter.com slash AG. You'll be glad you did.

Okay, welcome back. Let's check out Mueller's analysis on this, you know, trying to get McGann to lie, create a false document for the record, for the file. The trifecta evaluation? Yes. This is it. And I have a feeling he's going to check all three boxes on this. So first we have, do you? Yeah. You wrote the script. I did write it, but I did have a feeling.

I swear I had a feeling. It's like, I'm not going to watch Tatiana Agnose Boiler Alerts, but I know what happens at the end. So the obstructive act, the president's repeated efforts to get McGahn to create a record denying the president had directed him to fire at Mueller. Would qualify as an obstructive act if it had the natural tendency to constrain McGann from testifying truthfully or to undermine his credibility as a potential witness if he testified consistently with his memory rather than what the record said. Mueller says there is some evidence that when the New York Times and Washington Post published

those stories, the president believed the stories were wrong and that he never told McGann to have Rosenstein remove the special counsel. There's some evidence of that. The President correctly understood that McGann had not told the President directly that he planned to resign. In addition, the President told Prebus and Porter that he had not sought to terminate special counsel. And in the Oval Office meeting with McGann,

the President said, I never stood to fire Miller, I never said fire. That evidence could indicate the President was not attempting to persuade McGann to change his story, but was instead offering his own but different recollection of the substance of the June 2017 conversations with McGann and McGann's reaction to them. BUT, other evidence cuts against that understanding of Trump's conduct. As previously described, substantial evidence supports McGann's account that the president directed him to have the special counsel removed, including the timing and context of the president's

directive, the manner in which McGann reacted, and the fact that the president had been told the conflicts of interest were in substantial, were being considered by the Department of Justice and should be raised with the president's personal counsel rather than McGann. In addition, the president's subsequent denials that he told McGann to have special counsel removed were carefully worded. When first asked about the New York Times story, the president said fake news, fake news folks, a typical New York Times fake story. And when the president spoke with McGann in the Oval Office, he focused on whether he used the word fire, saying, I never said to firemolar, I never

said fire, did I say the word fire? The president's assertion in the Oval Office meeting that he never directed McGand to have the special counsel remove thus runs counter to the evidence. So Trump lied to cover his ass. That's not in the report, but that's what I'm saying. In addition, even Trump sincerely disagreed with McGand's memory, excuse me, in addition, even if Trump sincerely disagreed with McGand's memory about the June 17, 2017 events, the evidence indicates that the president knew by the time of the Oval Office meeting that McCann's account differed,

McGann's account differed, and that McGann was firm in his views, so he knew that before the meeting. Shortly after the story broke, Trump's lawyer told McGann's lawyer that the president wanted McGann to make a statement, denying he'd been asked to fire special counsel, but McGand responded through his counsel, saying that the aspect of the story was accurate, and therefore he could not comply. The president then directed Huckabee Sanders to tell McGand to correct the story, but McGand told her he would not do so, because the story was accurate on the president's order. And consistent with that position, McGand never issued a correction. More than a week later, the president brought the issue up again with Rob Porter, made comments indicating the president thought McGahn had leaked to the story and directed Porter to

have McGahn create a false record denying the president tried to fire Mueller. And at that point, the president said he might have to get rid of McGahn if McGahn did not comply. Oops. McGahn again refused to and told Porter as he told Sanders and his counsel what he told the president's counsel, which is the president had in fact ordered him to have Rosenstein remove special counsel. That evidence indicates by the time of the Oval Office meeting the president was aware that McGann did not think the time story was false

and that he did not want to issue a statement of correction or create a written record denying facts, McGann believed to be true. The president nevertheless persisted. I think that's on purpose, and I love you for it. The president nevertheless persisted and asked McGann to repudiate the facts that McGann had repeatedly said were accurate. So what I think Mueller is getting at here is that even if Trump didn't remember telling McGann

to fire special counsel, the evidence shows by the time he had the Oval Office meeting, he knew McGand wouldn't refute the time story, but asked him to refute it anyhow, thereby creating a false record. And that checks the obstructive act box, in my opinion. Mm-hmm. Check out, yeah.

Cheek. Mm-hmm. On to Nexus, to an official proceeding. By January 2018, special counsel's use of Grand jury had been further confirmed by the return of several indictments. So by now we've got not just a grand jury, but indictments. The president was also aware of the special counsel investigating obstruction related events. Because among other reasons, on January 8, 2018, Mueller's office provided his Trump's lawyers with a detailed list of topics for a possible interview with the president.

And the president knew that McGahn had personal knowledge of many of the events the special council was investigating, and McGann had already been interviewed by special council investigators. And this is big here, and the Oval Office meeting, the president indicated he knew that McGann had told the special council's office about the president's efforts to remove the special council. And so when you're doing a nexus to a proceeding,

you have to know that there's a proceeding, And in the Oval Office meeting, he said, I know you're talking to special counsel. So, he knew. Yeah. The president challenged McGahn for disclosing that information to Mueller and for taking notes that he viewed as creating unnecessary legal exposure. That evidence indicates the president's awareness that the June, you know, 2017 events were relevant to the special counsel's investigation and any grand jury investigation that might grow out of it. So, that's pretty straightforward. The evidence indicates we can check the next box. Yep. And then Mueller says to establish an access, it would be necessary to show the president's

actions would have the natural tendency to affect such a proceeding that the hinder delay or prevent the communication of information to law enforcement. And because McGahn had spoken to special counsels before, excuse me, because McGahn had spoken to the special council's office before January 2018, the president could not have been seeking to influence his prior statements, but because McGahn had repeatedly spoken to investigators and the obstruction inquiry was not complete, it was foreseeable that he would be interviewed again on obstruction-related topics. And if the president were focused solely on a press strategy, seeking to have McGann refute the New York Times article, a nexus to a proceeding or to further investigate or to further investigative

interviews would not be shown. But the president's efforts to have McGann write a letter for our records approximately 10 days after the stories came out well past the typical time to issue a correction for a new story indicates the president was not focused solely on a press strategy, but instead likely contemplated the ongoing investigation and any proceedings arising from it. Bus did. Yeah. This is nice.

Just hearing it all laid out. I love it. And then there's intent. And he just he opens up saying substantial evidence indicates that in repeatedly urging McGann to dispute that he was ordered to have Mueller fired, the president acted for the purpose of influencing McGann's account in order to deflect or prevent further scrutiny

of the president's conduct toward the investigation. Boom. Several facts support that conclusion. Mueller says Trump made repeated attempts to get McGann to change a story. As described above, by the time of the last attempt, the evidence suggests the president had been told on multiple occasions that McGahn believed the president had ordered him to fire Mueller.

McGahn interpreted his encounter with the president in the Oval Office back in June 2017 as an attempt to test his medal and see how, oh no, this is the more current Oval Office meeting. That was, you know, he's testing his metal and to see how committed he was to his memory of what happened. And the president already laid the groundwork for pressing McGann to alter his account by telling Rob Porter that it might be necessary to fire McGann as a big dumb mistake.

Mm-hmm. And Porter related that statement to McGann. So, oops. Yeah. wife, Peter. Yeah, it's crazy how he was the voice of reason in this case, little bit. And yet such a piece of shit. Yeah.

Like I don't want to forget that. Yeah. Two different women. The bars were all used. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I have a question about the next to a criminal proceeding that I should have asked

long ago. But is it that they need to establish that there was an excess to a criminal proceeding or that Trump or whoever the subject is of the charge was aware of the excess to the criminal proceeding? That his obstructive act was tied to the official proceeding somehow. Got it, right? So not the subject's awareness of that fact, but just if empirically it was tied to. Well, yes, because you would have to have knowledge of the official judicial proceeding or the official proceeding in order to have the obstructive

act be tied to the. Okay. So it is the knowledge parts specifically. Okay. Cool. Yes. That makes sense. Because in a sense, to me, that almost, that seems to just like beg intent, or like in tail intent on its own, but then intent is separate. Yeah, and that's a really interesting thing that you bring up because the obstructive act begs the nexus and the nexus begs the intent.

And they're all intertwined. They, and it's weird that some can exist without the others, but they can. Right. Because it's all just on, do we have actual words on a page or audio recordings or something that can prove each of these individually? Yeah. And intent and knowledge go hand in hand and knowledge of a nexus to proceeding goes hand

in hand with the obstructive act. You can't commit an obstructive act unless you know that it's somehow ties in. Yeah, it's all, yeah, it's like a weird vent diagram. It is very interesting. Trump's right in the middle. Yeah, yeah, additional evidence of Trump's intent, not that we needed more, but Mueller says you could get more evidence from the fact that his counsel was sufficiently alarmed by the prospect of the president's meeting with McGann. He is so much so that he

called McGann's counsel and said McGann could not resign, matter what happened in the Oval Office that day. And the president's counsel was aware of McGann's resolve not to issue what he believed to be a false account of the events despite the president's request. Finally, as noted above, the president brought up the special counsel investigation in his Oval Office meeting with McGann and criticized him for telling this office, Mueller's office, about the June 2017 events. So the president's statements reflect his understanding and his displeasure that those events would be part of an obstruction of justice inquiry.

So it's just all over the place. Displeasure. Displeasure. My president is he is fucked. I still love nevertheless who persisted. That's sneaky. Yeah. Still love nevertheless who persisted. That's sneaky. Yeah, yeah, I'm like, I don't like if I ever ever get to have lunch or talk to Muller one day or you know, I don't know who wrote this specific section

That I feel like somebody slid it in there. Yeah. Yeah, I want to know who like yeah, I've heard that phrase two times. Yeah, and this is one of them All right on to page 120 volume two, part J, the president's conduct toward Flynn, Manafort, and redacted. And I'm just going to go out and say 100% beans on that redacted name, because first of all, it's five letters long, and it isn't Cohen. And the reason I know it's not Cohen is because of the first sentence in the overview, which reads, in addition to the interactions with McGahn described above, the president has taken other actions directed at possible witnesses in the special, which reads, in addition to the interactions with McGahn described above, the president has taken other actions

directed at possible witnesses in the special counsel's investigation, including Flynn, Manafort, redacted, and as described in the next section, Cohen. So I know it's not Cohen. Yeah, I think it's Gates. No, it's Stone. It's definitely Stone. And that leads me because Trump didn't really

have any public statements about Gates. And so, I don't think that that's part of that. At least he wouldn't know anything. He did, he would show it. Yeah, and I think Gates didn't plead not guilty. He was cooperating, so I don't know if that's harm to an ongoing matter or not. Yeah, he just has his fingers forcibly in a few different cases for a guy. Yeah, yes.

So anyway, all my beans on it being stone. So let's check out the evidence. Again, I'm guessing what's behind these red action bars, but it seems pretty positive. Pretty logical that. Yeah, do I be in droll over by the way every week? Do our beans roll over beans. Roll over beans.

Oh, we need to make that happen. That's funny. So section one underpants one is about the conduct directed at Michael Flynn. And Mueller opens here with the stuff we already knew from volume two section two part B. We're on part J right now. This is part B. How Trump made positive public statements about Flynn all the time after Flynn's resignation, saying, he was a wonderful man, fine person, very good boy. I didn't say that.

I didn't say that. Okay. Good boy. The O.I. Mueller also mentioned that Trump sent private messages through intermediaries to Flynn encouraging him to stay strong. But in late November 2017, after Flynn began cooperating with Mueller and withdrew from the joint defense agreement known as a JDA with the Trump group, which that prompted John

Dowd to leave Flynn's lawyer a voicemail. And Dowd is not named here, but we know it's him, because since this report came out, the judge also released the audio of that voicemail. And this is the famous witness intimidation and pardoned angle voicemail. And Mueller doesn't publish the entire text of the voicemail, but instead puts out what he thinks is important to his investigation. And it says, in the Mueller report,

I understand your situation, but let me see if I can't state it in starker terms. It wouldn't surprise me if you've gone on to make a deal with the government. If there's information that implicates the president, then we've got a national security issue. So you know, we need some kind of heads up just for the sake of protecting all our interests, if we can. Remember what we've always said about

the president and his feelings towards Flynn, and that still remains. Like keep it up, buddy. Those feelings. I deal with the government. Why did my head, do I imagine him saying it like a deal with the devil? Yeah, that's just the worst thing. That's also such a weird way to phrase that when you're representing the president of the United States. Yeah. The whole thing is just strange. Yeah.

Like, eh, let me put this in stuck or terms for you to see. It should be, it should be read in that. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You know, I want to take a walk off a short fine ring.

I'm saying. I think. I don't know what I'm talking about. What's left out here is in consequential, although a lot of Republicans and Trump supporters were like, oh, he didn't put the whole statement in there. But the only thing that's missing is when he says who he is in the beginning, hey, this is John.

I, let me put this in starker terms for you. And then he repeats the thing about national security a couple of times and Mueller only puts it in here once because it gets the idea across. And then at the end he's like, okay, thanks, buddy, Pab, see ya, pal. And he left that out too. So the meat is still there, but we've heard the voicemail. We've actually got the audio. Of course we know the next day Flynn's lawyer called, Dowd, and said, and we can't give

you anything. We're no longer in the joint defense agreement. And that made doubt mad. I'm angry with you. This is a little droopy dog face. And he threatened Flynn's lawyer by saying he was going to tell Trump. I'm going to tell Trump that Flynn was being hostile towards Trump and that you might want to reconsider that because Flynn wouldn't want me to tell the president by cooperating.

You're saying he's being hostile? Yeah, by not sharing what they're telling the special counsel. And on December 1, 2017, Flynn, Flynn, Flynn. Flynn fleeted guilty. May as well be. Same name. To making false statements.

Persuant to a cooperation agreement, remember this. And the next day, Trump told the press, he was not concerned about what Flynn might tell the special counsel. In response to a question about whether the president still stood behind Flynn, Trump responded, we'll see what happens. That right there. So over the next several days, Trump made public statements expressing sympathy for Flynn

and indicating he'd not been treated fairly. And a couple weeks later, on December 15, the president responded to a press inquiry about whether he was considering a pardon for Flynn by saying, I don't want to talk about pardons for Flynn yet. We'll see what happens. Let's see. I can say this. When you look at what's gone on with the FBI and with the Justice Department, people are very, very angry. On page 122, yes, we're very angry at which, and you don't want to see me angry. It's just ridiculous. Page 122 trumps conduct towards Manafort. As we know, October 27th, 2017, Manafort and Gates were indicted on multiple felony counts.

And five months later in February, a grand jury added a bunch of superseding indictments for both of them. And a month before those superseding indictments came out, Manafort told Gates, he talked to the president's lawyers and they were going to take care of us. I didn't know this until I read the report. That's according to Gates' 302 as part of his cooperation. Manifort also told Gates it was stupid to plead because they'd be taken care of by the president. Pardon? Yeah. Gates asked Manifort outright if anyone mentioned pardons and Manafort said no one used that word Obviously, I never said we're not complete idiots here. I never said fire. Yeah

So Rob Porter recalled Trump telling him he never liked Manafort and discussed with AIDS Whether and in what way Manafort might be cooperating with special counsel and if Manafort knew any information That would be harmful to the president So that's huge and that's according to Porter and McGann and their 302s But in public Trump criticized the prosecution and said Manafort was being treated unfairly on June 15th 2018 before a scheduled court hearing on whether Manafort's bail should be revoked based on new charges that this Third-second superseding indictment third set of charges that Manafort had tampered with witnesses while on bail. The president told the press,

I feel badly about a lot of them because I think a lot of it is very unfair. I mean, I look at some of them where they go back 12 years like Manafort had nothing to do with our campaign. But I feel so, I tell you, I feel a little badly about it. They went back 12 years to get the things that he did 12 years ago. I feel badly for some people

because they've gone back 12 years to find things about somebody and did 12 years ago. I feel badly for some people because they've gone back 12 years to find things about somebody. And I don't think it's right. Oh, I get a key word for people on somebody as me. Like a Trump. Yeah, yeah, that makes sense. 12 years, 12 years, 12 years, 12 years. Mm.

12 years of shade. He's like a mad guy, yeah. And what do you mean 12 years? Like the whole Dara Paska thing happened very recently. All their yacht party shit. I think it was like his tax stuff. I don't know if it was 12 years old though,

but they connected it all to the money laundering. Yeah. From like 2008 when Trump was working for Yanukovych. Right. That's what I think that's all about. When Maniford, yeah, yeah, I know. I know that's what he's referencing, but then there's still like all the calimnic stuff

and stuff that's very relevant to your campaign. Yeah, he just left that out. Yeah. In response to a question about- Even though I know that that's not like, yeah, what the charges were about. Oh, of course, yeah, yeah, but that's yeah, that's what Trump was focused on. These crimes took place 12 years ago. I wasn't even running for president then. I wasn't even born. Yeah. So it's just dumb, but in response to a question about whether he was considering a pardon for Manafort or other individuals involved in Mueller's investigation, Trump said, I don't want to talk about that. No, I don't want to talk about that. But look, I don't want to see people treated

fairly. I do want to see people treated fairly. That's what it's all about. That's what it's all about. So hours later, Manafort's bail was revoked, and the president tweeted, wow, what a tough sentence for Manafort who has represented Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, and many other top political people and campaigns. Didn't know Manafort was the head of the mob. What about Comey and Cricket Hillary and all the others? Very unfair. Oh my God. Immediately following the revocation of Manafort's bail, Kalludi Rudy Giuliani gave a series of interviews where he raised the possibility of a pardon for Manafort's bail. Calouti Rudy Giuliani gave a series of interviews where he raised the possibility of a pardon for Manafort. Giuliani told the New York Daily News

that when this whole thing is over, the things might get cleared up with some presidential pardons. He actually said that. Giuliani also said in an interview that although the president should not pardon anyone while the special counsel's investigation was ongoing, he said when the investigation is concluded,

he's kind of on his own, right? So in a CNN interview two days later, Giuliani said, I guess I should clarify this once and for all. The president has issued no pardons in this investigation. The president is not going to issue pardons in this investigation when he got yelled at. When it's over, hey, he's the president of the United States. He retains pardon power. Nobody's taken that away from him. So he's still Calouti. Yep. So Giuliani rejected the suggestion that his and the president's comments could signal to the defendants that they should not cooperate in a Criminal prosecution because the pardon might follow saying the comments were certainly not intended that way. Giuliani said the comments only acknowledged that an individual involved in the investigation would not be excluded from a pardon.

In fact, if the president and his advisors come to the conclusion that you have been treated unfairly, which is what they said with their mouths, to the public. Giuliani observed that the pardons were not unusual in political investigations and said that doesn't mean they're going to happen, doesn't mean that anyone should rely on it. Big signal is, nobody's been pardoned yet. Yeah, that's the big signal. So on July 31, 2018, Manafort's trial began in the Eastern District of Virginia. And the next day, the president tweeted, this is terrible situation.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions should stop this rigged witch hunt right now before it continues to stain our country any further. Bob Mueller is totally conflicted and his 17 angry Democrats that are doing his dirty work are at disgrace to the USA. Jesus Christ. And minutes later, the president tweeted, Paul Manafort worked for Ronald Reagan, Bob Dolan, many other highly prominent and respected political leaders.

He worked for me for a very short time. Why didn't the government tell me he was under investigation? These old charges have nothing to do with collusion. A hoax. So later in that day, the president tweeted, looking back on history, who was treated worse? Al Capone, legendary mob boss killer in public enemy number one, are Paul Manafort, political operative and Reagan doll darling, now serving solitary confinement, although convicted of

nothing, where's the Russian collusion? The president's tweets about Manafort were widely covered by the press, obviously, not that they needed to be. And when asked about the president's tweets, Huckabee Sanders told the press obviously, not that they needed to be. And when asked about the president's tweets, how could be Sanders told the press, certainly the president's been clear. He thinks Paul Manafort's been treated unfairly. So on August 16th,

also what was it, what was it, Al Capone? Yeah, Al Capone. Treated way worse than Manafort. Well, although I'm pretty sure he got to have like bougie cells and stuff sometimes, but still, in terms of getting what he deserved in terms of being imprisoned, he got that eventually.

And he died of syphilis if I'm not mistaken, right? Same guy. I don't think it was syphilis. I think it was gonorrhea. No, it was syphilis. Gonorrhea is like a pun. We did see his cell though. Yeah, these are state penitentiary.

And it was, it did honestly look like something my mother would decorate in the best way. Yeah, he had a sweet cell. He really did. But nowadays, no one has cells like that anymore. That was back then, and this is now. Yeah, welcome.

Everybody will live in pain, except when they tried to put Manafort in Rikers. Yeah. And the DOJ was like, that's true. Yeah, and we just let that go, I guess. We can't be shit about it. Yeah, and then of course, there was Epstein's terrible jail sentence that he had to serve 12 hours at a time. Oh, 12 hours.

Getting to spend the rest of the time in his office and his mansion, how was it? You made me realize. I'm currently 12 hours. Oh, no, that too. That's not making jokes. Yeah, yeah, but. So then on August 16th, 2018, the Manafort case

was submitted to the jury. Deliberations began and at that time Giuliani had recently suggested to reporters that Mueller's investigation needed to be done in the next two or three weeks and media stories reported that a Manafort acquittal would add criticism that the special counsel investigation was not worth time and expense, whereas a conviction would show that ending the investigation would be premature. As a jury deliberation in the Manafort trial continued, in an impromptu exchange with reporters that lasted about five minutes, the president twice called the special council's

investigation a rigged witch hunt, then asked whether he would pardon Manafort when he was asked if he was pardoned Manafort. If he was convicted, the president said, I don't talk about that now. I don't talk about that. That's great. Sounds like someone sat down and was like, I don't talk about that now, I don't talk about that. That's great. Sounds like someone sat down and was like, we don't talk about this Donald. Donald? I don't talk about that.

Fuck up, don't you? It sounds like a weird song lyric. I don't talk about that now. I don't talk about that. Oh, yeah. What was the one earlier I was thinking of? Oh, it's not unusual. Oh, you mentioned that line.

I'm not unusual. Bye, anyone. I don't talk about that line. I'm not unusual. I'm not unusual. Bye, anyone. I don't talk about that now. I don't talk about that. D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D- of time, but you know what? He happens to be a very good person, and I think it's very sad what they've done to Paul Manivort. Someone who slipped through the cracks for years and now has been brought to light as the criminal that they are because of their association with your potentially criminal behavior is not a sad story. It is so sad. George, it's so sad for him. Yes, sadness is very subjected by supposed.

This is in the scene. It's really squirreling. Yeah, the only thing that's sad is that we can't do that to all white collar criminals, because it's such an underfunded section of the FBI, and they can't freaking stay on top of these fuckers. I have a question on the table. The president did not take further questions. After that, in response to the president's statements, Manafort's attorney said, Mr. Manafort really appreciates the support of President Trump.

Then a few days later, Manifort was found guilty on eight counts and co-inpleted guilty to eight counts, including campaign finance felonies, that he said Trump directed. So that all happened in August 21st, good day. Was it like it says in my short episode about eight counts? Like the number of the eight. Eight. Well, like if every courtroom had that guy, how would he have it be so good? Today is brought to you by the number eight.

Oh it's amazing. Eight felony counts. I can't do the cookie monster for two more. It was pretty good. It was counter Dracula but I like how you made a cookie monster. You're like I'm just doing it. Yeah well I had that sesame street phone and cookie monster was nine. Nine.

That's cute. But yeah, eight. Taylor Cookie Monster. Hey, it's Melania. Oh, oh, oh, oh. No, there's, have you seen that? Was it you that showed me that video of the Cookie Monster? Monster nine versus Cookie Monster. Oh, I got a two line.

Ishtubloch. Nine. Okay, everybody right now, stop. Google. Bromstein versus Cookie Monster. You won't be sorry. It's not a Nazi cookie monster. No, Ramstein's an old industrial band.

The band, right? Yeah, like Nights or Ab or Inser'd Sunday, New Eye Bout in her front, 2.42, just all that old dead. Hey, what's up, people that are 45 or so? I hear they're good though. That's who I would dance to. They're sweaty. That's for sure. Are sweaty? I mean, yeah, they need to play. Yeah.

Guns fire. No. Pancao life. Yeah, it's just it's good stuff if you're into that. Anyway, back to politics. So the president reacted to Manafort's convictions that day by telling reporters, Paul Manifort's a good man, he just was convicted. It's a very sad thing that happened, the law. Trump again described the special counsel's investigation as a witch hunt that ends in disgrace. The next day, the president tweeted, I feel very badly for Paul Manifort and his wonderful family.

Justice, in quotes, took a 12-year-old tax case among other things, applied tremendous pressure on him, and unlike Michael Cohen, he refused to break, made up stories in order to get a deal, such a brave man. And in a Fox News interview on August 22nd, the president said, Cohen makes a better deal when he uses me, like everybody else. And one of the reasons I respect Paul Manafort so much as he went through that trial, you

know, they make up stories. People make up stories. The whole thing is about flipping, they call it. I know about flipping. The president said that flipping was not fair and almost ought to be outlawed in response to a question about whether he was considering a pardon for Manafort. Again, they keep asking him. The president said, I have great respect for what he's done in terms of what he's gone through he worked for many many

People many many years many years and I would say what he did I'm reading this word for word some of the charges They threw against him very consultant very every lobby every lobbyist every consultant in Washington probably does So then Julie on he told fix that yeah, they shouldn't be doing that Right if your friends lobbiedffocliff would you yeah Donald we don't do that. Don't talk about Donald. I don't do that. I don't talk Donald Show me on the doll where Mueller hurt you. Yeah, where is his mom? Where was his mom? I guess is a question. Yeah, he needs He needs a good mother. I mean I want to say maybe

she was the voice of reason I just like didn't want to deal with his shitty dad because we know for a fact. Maybe he could buy up his wife mother. Oh yeah. I've never seen anything about his mom actually. Exactly. I see stuff about a shitty dad but I've never really seen anything about his mom. I feel like photos of her because she has a whipped up looking cotton candy here to do as well. Dorothy I think. Oh that's adorable. So he was just born like that. Yeah. I think you just. Lady Gaga. Yeah. Yeah. Got it. For sure. So then Rudy, Rudy, Rudy, Rudy told journalists, the president really thinks Manifort has been horribly treated. And he and the president had discussed a political fallout of the president pardon Manifort. They discussed a pardon. So Giuliani let everybody

know that the next day Giuliani told Washington Post that the president pardoned Manafort. They discussed a pardon. So Giuliani let everybody know that. The next day Giuliani told Washington Post that the president had asked his lawyers for advice on the possibility of a pardon for Manafort and other aides and had been counseled against considering a pardon until the investigation concluded. I don't know why, like, I don't understand that the end of the investigation

would make a pardon, okay? I guess because you'd be obstructing the investigation if you pardoned During, that would be another obstruction of justice charge. Yeah. How can you pardon someone that hasn't been convicted? Yeah, you can pardon them for future crimes or some... They're like, let your witch hunt, you know, go to a complete full investigation. Now I'm ending it.

I can see him using that argument. Totally. That's crazy to be pardoned for future crimes. Yeah, I think that's like, Ford did for Nixon. Yeah, that's like getting that thing in Mario Kart when you're invincible. He's just going around just like fucking blasting

everything in your pocket. Boy, yeah, I just would know. You fall off a cliff and you just like swirl back up to the real world. I'm like Mario Kart, but I did play Mario Brothers. Oh nice, I like Mario Kartie. I like Mario Kartie. Yeah, they're all fun. Oh, it's Mario Party the World. And we? Mario Party is fun. Yeah, I have play Mario Brothers. Oh nice, I like Mario Party. Yeah, they're all fun.

Yeah, it's Mario Party the Wolf. And we? Mario Party is fun. Yeah, I have played Mario Party. Oh, we all got to play. Mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom, mom team. 2018, Manifort pleaded guilty to charges in the District of Columbia and signed a plea agreement that required him to cooperate with investigators. This was his other case. Giuliani was reported to have publicly said, and you know what I think? And this is super space beans. But I think you

remember how he at like they were trying to get him to consolidate his cases into one case and he's like, no, keep them separated. Oh, and and I was like, why the fuck would you do that? I have to go through two trials. You have to have to it's so my expensive. But what if I was like, why the fuck would you do that? I have to go through two trials. You have to have to, it's so my expensive. But what if he was going to plead not guilty in one, so he could get that angle for the pardon and plead guilty in the other so he could get information to Trump? Like, that's, I feel like that might be a, that's a theory. You also just put me on this like weird, like, wormhole in my head about the offspring, the band, you just referenced. Now I'm thinking about the ice references

because they're called the offspring. They had the song, the kids are not all right, or the kids are not all right, and then you gotta keep them separated. I'm like, oh my God, am I just like still high right now? Or are they like prophetic? Yeah. There's only three song references I can think of there.

That's okay. If I look at the whole thing, I'm sure I can make all kinds of connections to the offspring and ice. Let's get a mash up. Yeah. If we look at the whole thing, I'm sure I can make all kinds of connections to the offspring and ice. Let's get a mashup. Yeah. So yeah, I just just occurred to me two separate trials and he wanted that he asked for that and he pleaded not guilty and won and guilty and the other and Giuliani was reported to have publicly said Manafort remained in a joint defense agreement with the president following his guilty plea and agreement to cooperate and that Manafort's attorney is regularly briefed the president's lawyers on the topics discussed that you know between special counsel and Manafort and the information Manafort provided in the interviews. And then on November 26th, special counsel 2018, special counsel's

office disclosed in a public court filing that Manafort had breached his plea agreement by lying about multiple subjects on multiple occasions. And the next day Giuliani said, but by then he might have gotten all this information to Trump, right? So maybe he was planning to have two separate trials, not guilty in one, see what happened, guilty in the other, feed all the information in the joint defense agreement to Trump and Trump's attorneys, and then blow up his breaches plea agreement. Yeah. So I play in blackjack, hoping for a part. Splitting his hand. Yeah, split asus. The next day, Giuliani said that the president

had been upset for weeks about what he considered to be the un-American horrible treatment of Manafort. In an interview on November 28, 2018, Trump suggested it was very brave of Manafort because he didn't flip. If you told the truth, you go to jail. You know this flipping stuff is terrible. You flip, and you lie, and you get the prosecutors. We'll tell you 99% of the time

They can get people to flip. It's rare that they can't but I had three people Manifort Corsi I don't know of course But he refuses to say what they demanded Manifort Corsi and redacted It's actually very brave and that redacted bit is probably stone and when Trump was asked about a pardon for Manifort again He said it was never discussed, but I wouldn't take it off the table. Why would I take it off the table? So now he's saying it's on the table Didn't Manifort again. He said it was never discussed, but I wouldn't take it off the table. Why would I take it off the table? So now he's saying it's on the table. Didn't Maniford get charged with lying? Yeah. So that's funny. So that's funny. Yeah. Yeah. It is breach of plea. Right. Well, the irony in him saying that a cone was the one

that was lying. And then here we are, someone who's actually on record as a liar. Yeah, so it's going. It's lying, lying, lying. They're all flicking liars. Then we get to who's actually on record as a liar. Yeah, so it's going. It's lying. Lying. Lying. They're all fucking liars Then we get to subsection three on page 128 this entire section is fully redacted and likely contains Trump's treatment of Roger Stone and how he pleaded not guilty And was strong and brave for not flipping on Trump. That's why I think it was stone when he's like oh, he didn't flip It was very brave because stone did the same thing stone pleaded guilty and was, and Trump has said things along those lines about Stone being brave and strong and a good man. He is just so none of this thing, I know. Not one single sentence is left unredacted in this section and it's all harm to an ongoing

matter. I think it's pretty clear what's under there. Who's under where is under there? Stones. So we'll be right back with the analysis of this section on page 131, so stick around. Hiring a great employee can be really, really time consuming. You have to put the announcement on 100 websites. You have to review hundreds of resumes.

You have to match your qualifications to the position that you're filling. But no more. There is a one-stop shop for all your hiring needs and it's zippercrooter.com slash AG. Zippercrooter sends your job to over a hundred of the web's leading job boards for you, but they don't stop there. Their powerful matching technology scans thousands of resumes to find people with the right experience and invites them to apply to your job so you don't end up with a zillion resumes from

candidates that don't match your experience requirements. As the applications come in, Zippercruder analyzes each one and spotlights the top 10 applicants so you never miss a great candidate. And it's so effective that 4 out of 5 employers who use Zippercrooter get a quality candidate within the first day. Right now our listeners can try Zippercrooter for free at this exclusive web address zippercrooter.com slash AG. That's zippercrooter.com slash AG. One last time zippercrooter.com slash AG. That's zip recruiter dot comm slash AG. One last time, zip recruiter dot comm slash AG. It's a recruiter, the smartest way to hire. All right, welcome back. Let's hit the analysis of section J as in John on page 131. And let's begin with the obstructive act as we always do. We don't want I think the reason we don't mix these up and

Jordan has something to do with what you're saying the obst obstructive act begs the nexus, which begs the intent. And so I think that's kind of the order, and that's why he put him in this order. Very smart, smart fella. See? So the president's actions towards witnesses in the special counsel investigation would qualify as obstructive if they had the natural tendency to prevent particular witnesses from testifying truthfully or otherwise would have the probable effect of influencing delaying or preventing their testimony to law enforcement. So he defines that.

And with regards to Flynn, the president sent private and public messages to Flynn encouraging him to stay strong and conveying that the president still cared about him. I still care. She thinks I still care. I don't watch the swingers the other night, sorry. So he did that before he began, before Flynn began to cooperate with the government. When Flynn's attorneys withdrew him

from the joint defense agreement with the president, signaling Flynn was potentially cooperating with the government, Trump's personal counsel initially reminded Flynn's counsel over the president's warm feelings towards Flynn and said that still remains, but when Flynn's council When Flynn's council reiterated that Flynn could no longer share information under a joint defense agreement, the personal council stated that decision would be interpreted as reflecting Flynn's hostility towards, I'm going to tell on you Basically, and that sequence of events could have had the potential to affect Flynn's decision to cooperate, as well as the extent of that cooperation, because of privilege issues, however,

we could not determine whether the president was personally involved in or knew about the specific message his counsel delivered to Flynn's counsel. So basically, we can't check off the Flynn obstructive act box because we can't prove because of privilege. And this is one of those things where Mueller was like, people didn't cooperate, they pleaded the fifth, they invoked privilege. This is one of those instances because of privilege, they couldn't determine that Trump knew about the message, that voicemail that died left.

Yeah, that privilege saves him. It did. So the joint defense agreement was a reason why Flynn's lawyer said they couldn't hand over documents to Trump because it would implicate the other folks that were involved in the joint defense agreement. Well, when Flynn pulled out of the joint defense agreement and was cooperating with the government, that's why Flynn couldn't give any information to Trump because they're no longer in the joint defense agreement because we're cooperating now and we can't tell you anything.

Got it. And so when Dowd left that voicemail, basically threatening, you know, you don't want me to tell on you. Yeah. Let me put this in starker terms. We need to know what's going on. You have to tell us what you're telling them. And he's like, I can't tell you.

We aren't in the joint defense agreement anymore. We're cooperating with the government. It's part of the cooperation deal. Who is he in the joint defense agreement? Sorry, I'm blanking and trying. Oh, okay. Trump, Manafort, Flynn, all those fuckers. Got it. Got it. We're all in a joint defense agreement. Okay, got it. So long ago. Yep. Long a time ago. So anyway, because of the they couldn't prove, because first of all, they didn't interview Trump. And second of all, because of, you know, lying liars.

Privilege. Yeah. They couldn't prove that Trump knew that doubt left that voicemail for Flynn's lawyer. I'm sure he did, but they don't have that evidence, so we can't check the box for this, for Flynn, for obstructive acts. But Maniford, on the other hand,

Mueller reiterates all the things Trump had said to the public throughout his indictment. Manafort's indictment and his trial is conviction is guilty plea, his plea agreement, his breach of his plea agreement. We've already covered that in detail. And then Mueller says there is evidence the president's actions had the potential to influence Manafort's decisions, whether to cooperate with the government or not. Mueller then says the president's public statements during the Manafort trial also had the

potential to influence the trial jury. On the second day of trial, for example, the president called the prosecution a terrible situation in a hoax, and that continues to stain our country, and referred to Manifort as a regendol darling who was serving solitary confinement, even though he was convicted of nothing. And those statements were widely picked up by the press. While jurors were instructed not to watch or read the news stories about the case and presumed to follow those instructions. The President's statements during the trial generated substantial media coverage that could have reached jurors if they happened to see the statements or learn about them from

others. And the President's statements during jury deliberations that Manifort happens to be a very good person and it's very sad what they've done to him had the potential to influence jurors who learned of the statements which the President made just influence jurors who learned of the statements, which the president made just as jurors were considering whether or not to convict or acquit him. So because Manafort had a trial and there was a jury, now you're talking obstruction of justice

or obstructive act. Damn, changes the game. And then Moller addresses the stone stuff, but that's all redacted. And I particularly think it would influence the stone stuff because stone is going to trial. And so that is the same along the lines of Manafort. But Flynn, not so much.

Flynn didn't have a trial. And we couldn't prove that that voicemail was left, that dangling pardon voicemail that Trump knew about it. So check the boxes for obstructive act for Manafort, for sure, stone, I think, but that's all redacted. Then we're on to the nexus to a proceeding and Mueller concludes that the president's actions toward Flynn, Manafort, and redacted stone appear to have been connected to an official proceeding for all three dudes. So check that box on the nexus for all three.

And then on to intent, Mueller says evidence concerning the president's intent related to Flynn is inconclusive. As previously noted, because of privilege, we do not have evidence establishing whether the president knew about or was involved in those communications with Flynn's counsel from doubt. Seems like if doubt didn't tell his client that he was doing that, that he'd be disbarred for that, but it seems like a big ethical problem. Yeah. He had a whole administration.

Evidence concerning the conduct towards Manafort does indicate Trump intended to encourage Manafort not to cooperate with the government. Before Manafort was convicted, the president repeatedly stated that Manafort had been treated unfairly. One day after Manafort was convicted on eight felony charges and potentially faced a lengthy prison term. The president said that Manafort was a brave man for refusing to break and that flipping almost ought to be outlawed.

And at the same time, although the president had privately told AIDS he didn't like manor for it, he publicly called manor for it a good man and said he had a wonderful family. And when the president was asked whether he was considering a pardon, the president did not respond directly and instead said he had a great respect for what manor for it's done and in terms of what he's gone through. The president added some of the charges they threw against him, every consultant, every lobbyist in Washington probably does. In light of the president's previous statements that the investigations might get cleaned

up with some pardons and that a pardon would be possible if the president comes to the conclusion you've been treated unfairly, the evidence supports the inference that the president intended man for it to believe he could get a pardon, which would make cooperation with the government unnecessary. So here's Mueller telling us flat out they dangled a pardon. That could influence Manafort. That is the show that proves intent. Right.

Mueller then addresses Manafort's intent in making public statements about him during his trial and says that some evidence shows he intended to influence the jury. So here we are back on the jury. But there are alternative explanations for his statements, including he might have genuinely felt bad for Polly Walnuts. And even though that's inconclusive, Mueller seems to indicate there is evidence of intent to stop Manafort from cooperating. So that alone would appear to check the intent box for Manafort. Then, of course, we have the redacted part about Stone.

So in summary, the president's conduct toward Manafort checks all three boxes. His conduct toward Flynn checks the nexus box, but not the obstructive act or intent. And we don't know about stone, honestly. I think it might check to, I think it probably checks at least one box. I think it checks the nexus. I don't know about intent or obstructive act. And you know, this is why we know we don't know about stone. And that's why the House Dems have petitioned the court to get the unredacted report, this stuff about stone. And here, probably one of the things

that they want to see and all the underlying evidence along with the grand jury material, so they can make determinations on obstruction for the redacted stuff like this. And once the trial is over and the impeachment hearings begin, I assume we will get the answer to whether the president's conduct towards stone amounted to obstruction of justice.

Like I said, based on the analysis of the evidence, I assume it will. As Trump's statement about stone could have influenced the jury, but the obstructive act criteria seems up in the air to me. But the intent on the stone stuff is clear. To me, at least, I'm guessing. We should tell you, if you're listening to 20 years from now that since our last installment of this series since part 16 The house stems have decided to vote on judiciary committee rules that match that of the Nixon impeachment

And we're about to begin full-blown impeachment hearings Although we have not voted on a resolution to open an impeachment inquiry But during Watergate they didn't take that step until after five months of having hearings So that might be where we're at. So that's part 17. How you feel? Cool. Yeah. Yeah, a lot of information, even though we've talked about so much of it, it still feels so heavy.

Yeah, there's just some stuff in here that we hadn't, that it wasn't publicly reported, like Manafort telling Gates, don't plead, man, we're gonna get pardoned, but don't use the word pardon. Right, right. We hadn't heard about that. That wasn't publicly reported, or if it was, we're gonna get pardoned, but don't use the word pardon. Right, right. We hadn't heard about that. That wasn't how that's reported. Or if it was, we missed it. So join us next week for part 18,

sections K and L, pages 134 to 158. Those are the final two sections before we get to section three and four, the legal defenses and the conclusions, along with the back matter, which is all the appendices. Back matter. I thought about that too.

Yeah. Back matter. Any final thoughts? I'm a front matter person myself, I think. No, not really. It's all pretty straightforward. He covers everything pretty well. Yeah, yeah.

So just to clarify, how many more molar reports do you think will do? Because some people have them requesting we go back to the book reports. They have like a lot of suggestions. I think we have three more to go. 18, 19, 20. Nice. I think we have three more to go. But we may be able to get the last two with sections three, four and the conclusions along with the backman, or we may be able to get those all into one episode, so we might be able to get it done in two episodes, but three at the most. Nice, nice. I'm enjoying the ride, but yeah, there's a lot of suggestions out there, like so many books that I've been having. Yeah, I want to do a proof of conspiracy next.

Sweet, to be honest. And then, but you know, we also want to release to the public, which was only previously released to patrons, our coverage of the threat by Andrew McCabe, because that is a very pertinent and relevant story. Yeah, it's a good one. In these times, and that could take seven episodes. It will take seven episodes, because that's how many we recorded.

Yeah. If you're not a patron and you want early access to all this and add free daily beans and stuff like that, you can sign up at patreon.com slash muller she wrote or patreon.com slash the daily beans. It's pretty fun. I like it. I like it too. I love the Facebook group.

Yeah, we have a huge Facebook group, very cool community. We do the fantasy indictment like there and we also play it on on Patreon. If you can case, you're not a Facebook person, which is fair, but the group makes me like Facebook, like the people. It's the main reason I'm there. Yeah, I have. Honestly, but the network of people is just absolutely outstanding. If you've ever been to a live show, you know what it's like to be among our community.

And it's just one of the coolest. Anyway, thank you so much for listening. Take care of yourself, take care of each other, and take care of the planet. I've been A.G. I've been Jolissa Johnson. I've been Jordan Coburn. And this is Muellerullershi Road. Mullershi Road is produced and engineered by AG with editing and logo design by Jolissa Johnson.

Our marketing consultant and social media manager is Sarah Lee Steiner and our subscriber and communications director is Jordan Coburn. Fact checking and research by AG and research assistants by Jolissa Johnson and Jordan Coburn. Our merchandising managers are Sarah Least, Diner and Sarah Hershberger Valencia. Our web design and branding are by Joelle Reader with Mopsy Design Studios and our website is mullershierote.com. Hi, I'm Harry Lickman, host of Talking Feds. Around Table, the brings together prominent figures from government law and journalism for a dynamic discussion of the most important topics of the day. Each Monday, I'm joined by a slate of Feds favorites at new voices

to break down the headlines and give the insiders view of what's going on in Washington and beyond. Plus, sidebar is explaining important legal concepts read by your favorite celebrities. Find Talking Feds wherever you get your podcasts. M-S-O-W-Media.