SPECTRUM. WE WILL CONTINUE ON WATCH THEM
WE WILL CONTINUE ON WATCH THEM SCREW THIS UP.
SCREW THIS UP. WE’LL HAVE MORE ON BOTH THESE
WE’LL HAVE MORE ON BOTH THESE STORIES TONIGHT.
STORIES TONIGHT. WE’RE IN OUR USUAL GROOVE OF
WE’RE IN OUR USUAL GROOVE OF EXPECTING MORE BREAKING AND
EXPECTING MORE BREAKING AND DEVELOPING NEWS OVER THE
DEVELOPING NEWS OVER THE EVENING.
EVENING. THAT’S IN PART BECAUSE OF A BIG
THAT’S IN PART BECAUSE OF A BIG STORY THAT WAS BROKEN LATE
STORY THAT WAS BROKEN LATE TONIGHT BY THE "WALL STREET
TONIGHT BY THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL."
JOURNAL." THIS STORY THE "WALL STREET
THIS STORY THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL" HAS BROKEN TONIGHT IS
JOURNAL" HAS BROKEN TONIGHT IS SOMETHING THE LEGAL EXPERTS HAVE
SOMETHING THE LEGAL EXPERTS HAVE BEEN TELLING US, WE SHOULD HAVE
BEEN TELLING US, WE SHOULD HAVE EXPECTED IT.
EXPECTED IT. MAYBE THAT’S TRUE.
MAYBE THAT’S TRUE. MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE GUESSED
MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE GUESSED THAT THIS WAS HAPPENING BEHIND
THAT THIS WAS HAPPENING BEHIND THE SCENES.
THE SCENES. IT DOESN’T FEEL LIKE IT.
IT DOESN’T FEEL LIKE IT. FOR THOSE OF US WATCHING THIS
FOR THOSE OF US WATCHING THIS PRESIDENCY OF LATE, AND WATCHING
PRESIDENCY OF LATE, AND WATCHING THE SCANDAL THAT ENVELOPES THIS
THE SCANDAL THAT ENVELOPES THIS PRESIDENCY, MORE AND MORE ON A
PRESIDENCY, MORE AND MORE ON A DAILY BASIS.
DAILY BASIS. THIS NEWS BROKEN BY THE "WALL
THIS NEWS BROKEN BY THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL," IT DOES FEEL
STREET JOURNAL," IT DOES FEEL LIKE A SURPRISE.
LIKE A SURPRISE. YOU SEE THE HEADLINE THERE.
YOU SEE THE HEADLINE THERE. RIGHT TO THE HEART OF THE
RIGHT TO THE HEART OF THE MANNER.
MANNER. MANAFORT SOUGHT DEAL IN NEXT
MANAFORT SOUGHT DEAL IN NEXT TRIAL.
TRIAL. THAT MEANS TRUMP CAMPAIGN CHAIR
THAT MEANS TRUMP CAMPAIGN CHAIR PAUL MANAFORT SOUGHT A DEAL WITH
PAUL MANAFORT SOUGHT A DEAL WITH ROBERT MUELLER.
ROBERT MUELLER. WITH THE PROSECUTORS AT THE
WITH THE PROSECUTORS AT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE WHO ARE
SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE WHO ARE ABOUT TO PUT HOW MANY TRIAL FOR
ABOUT TO PUT HOW MANY TRIAL FOR ANOTHER ROUND OF FELONY CHARGES
ANOTHER ROUND OF FELONY CHARGES IN FEDERAL COURT.
IN FEDERAL COURT. BUT QUOTE, TALKS BROKE DOWN.
BUT QUOTE, TALKS BROKE DOWN. TO UNDERSTAND WHY, AT LEAST TO
TO UNDERSTAND WHY, AT LEAST TO THE NONLAWYERS AMONG US, THIS IS
THE NONLAWYERS AMONG US, THIS IS SUCH A JARRING HEADLINE.
SUCH A JARRING HEADLINE. JUST STAND BACK AND LOOK AT THE
JUST STAND BACK AND LOOK AT THE LEGAL TROUBLE AND THE LEGAL
LEGAL TROUBLE AND THE LEGAL INVESTIGATIONS THAT ARE CIRCLING
INVESTIGATIONS THAT ARE CIRCLING THE PRESIDENT AND HIS BUSINESS
THE PRESIDENT AND HIS BUSINESS AND HIS CHILDREN.
AND HIS CHILDREN. THE BIGGEST NEWS OF THE LAST
THE BIGGEST NEWS OF THE LAST WEEK WAS THE PRESIDENT’S LONG
WEEK WAS THE PRESIDENT’S LONG TIME LAWYER PLEADING GUILTY ON
TIME LAWYER PLEADING GUILTY ON EIGHT FELONY FEDERAL CHARGES.
EIGHT FELONY FEDERAL CHARGES. AND HIS PLEA IN THE INFORMATION
AND HIS PLEA IN THE INFORMATION FILED BY PROSECUTORS IN
FILED BY PROSECUTORS IN QUESTION, HIS GUILTY PLEA,
QUESTION, HIS GUILTY PLEA, MICHAEL COHEN NOT ONLY ADMITTED
MICHAEL COHEN NOT ONLY ADMITTED HIMSELF TO COMMITTING EIGHT
HIMSELF TO COMMITTING EIGHT FELONIES, HE IMPLICATED THE
FELONIES, HE IMPLICATED THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF STAYING
PRESIDENT HIMSELF STAYING PRESIDENT DIRECTED HIM TO COMMIT
PRESIDENT DIRECTED HIM TO COMMIT THE CRIMES.
THE CRIMES. IT ALSO IMPLICATED, INCLUDING
IT ALSO IMPLICATED, INCLUDING TWO SPECIFIED EMPLOYEES,
TWO SPECIFIED EMPLOYEES, EXECUTIVE ONE AND EXECUTIVE TWO
EXECUTIVE ONE AND EXECUTIVE TWO AT THE PRESIDENT’S BUSINESS.
AT THE PRESIDENT’S BUSINESS. HE ALSO IMPLICATED ANOTHER
HE ALSO IMPLICATED ANOTHER BUSINESS CALLED AMERICAN MEDIA
BUSINESS CALLED AMERICAN MEDIA WHICH IS THE PUBLISHER OF THE
WHICH IS THE PUBLISHER OF THE NATIONAL"NATIONAL ENQUIRER"," HI
NATIONAL"NATIONAL ENQUIRER"," HI ALSO IMPLICATED PEOPLE FROM THE
ALSO IMPLICATED PEOPLE FROM THE PRESIDENT’S CAMPAIGN.
PRESIDENT’S CAMPAIGN. THE COURT APPEARANCE LAST WEEK
THE COURT APPEARANCE LAST WEEK AND DOCUMENTS PROSECUTORS FILED
AND DOCUMENTS PROSECUTORS FILED IN CONNECTION WITH THAT PLEA
IN CONNECTION WITH THAT PLEA THEREFORE APPEARED TO BE A SORT
THEREFORE APPEARED TO BE A SORT OF ROAD MAP INDICATING OTHER
OF ROAD MAP INDICATING OTHER POTENTIAL INDICTMENTS IN THE
POTENTIAL INDICTMENTS IN THE FUTURE, OR AT LEAST POINTING TO
FUTURE, OR AT LEAST POINTING TO OTHER CO-CONSPIRATORS IN THESE
OTHER CO-CONSPIRATORS IN THESE FELONIES TO WHICH MICHAEL COHEN
FELONIES TO WHICH MICHAEL COHEN PLED GUILTY WHICH RELATED TO HIM
PLED GUILTY WHICH RELATED TO HIM MAKING ILLICIT PAYMENTS TO
MAKING ILLICIT PAYMENTS TO INFLUENCE THE ELECTIONFUL WILL
INFLUENCE THE ELECTIONFUL WILL THERE BE FURTHER PROSECUTIONS OF
THERE BE FURTHER PROSECUTIONS OF THE PEOPLE IMPLICATED IN THE
THE PEOPLE IMPLICATED IN THE PLEA DEAL?
PLEA DEAL? WE DON’T KNOW.
WE DON’T KNOW. WILL THE ALLEGATIONS OF OTHER
WILL THE ALLEGATIONS OF OTHER CONSPIRATORS, WILL THAT LEAD TO
CONSPIRATORS, WILL THAT LEAD TO FURTHER INVESTIGATION WHICH MAY
FURTHER INVESTIGATION WHICH MAY LEAD TO OTHER CRIMINAL CASES?
LEAD TO OTHER CRIMINAL CASES? WE DON’T KNOW.
WE DON’T KNOW. BUT LATE LAST WEEK WE DID GET
BUT LATE LAST WEEK WE DID GET WORD THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY MANY
WORD THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY MANY NEW YORK IS CONSIDERING PURSUING
NEW YORK IS CONSIDERING PURSUING CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST THE
CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST THE TRUMP ORGANIZATION.
TRUMP ORGANIZATION. WHICH IS THE PRESIDENT’S
WHICH IS THE PRESIDENT’S BUSINESS.
BUSINESS. AND TWO SENIOR COMPANY OFFICIALS
AND TWO SENIOR COMPANY OFFICIALS IN QUESTION, THE CRIMINAL ACTS
IN QUESTION, THE CRIMINAL ACTS TO WHICH COHEN PLED IN FEDERAL
TO WHICH COHEN PLED IN FEDERAL COURT LAST WEEK.
COURT LAST WEEK. THE NEWS ALSO SIMULTANEOUSLY
THE NEWS ALSO SIMULTANEOUSLY BROKE THE NEW YORK STATE
BROKE THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS ALREADY
ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS ALREADY SOUGHT A CRIMINAL REFERRAL UNDER
SOUGHT A CRIMINAL REFERRAL UNDER STATE LAW FOR NEW YORK STATE TAX
STATE LAW FOR NEW YORK STATE TAX CHARGES, IN ADDITION TO THE
CHARGES, IN ADDITION TO THE FEDERAL TAX CHARGES THAT MICHAEL
FEDERAL TAX CHARGES THAT MICHAEL COHEN HAS ALREADY PLED TO.
COHEN HAS ALREADY PLED TO. THAT STATE NEW YORK STATE
THAT STATE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS ALREADY
ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS ALREADY BROUGHT CHARGES AGAINST THE
BROUGHT CHARGES AGAINST THE PRESIDENT’S FOUNDATION, THE
PRESIDENT’S FOUNDATION, THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF AND THE
PRESIDENT HIMSELF AND THE PRESIDENT’S THREE ELDEST
PRESIDENT’S THREE ELDEST CHILDREN, DON JR., E-IVANKAA AND
CHILDREN, DON JR., E-IVANKAA AND ERIC.
ERIC. THEY HAVE ALREADY REFERRED THAT
THEY HAVE ALREADY REFERRED THAT CASE AGAINST THE TRUMP
CASE AGAINST THE TRUMP FOUNDATION TO THE PUBLIC
FOUNDATION TO THE PUBLIC INTEGRITY DIVISION AT THE
INTEGRITY DIVISION AT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, TO THE
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, TO THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION AND
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION AND TO THE IRS FOR FEDERAL
TO THE IRS FOR FEDERAL PROSECUTION.
PROSECUTION. THE FEDERAL PROSECUTORS BROUGHT
THE FEDERAL PROSECUTORS BROUGHT A HUGE CIVIL TAX CASE AGAINST
A HUGE CIVIL TAX CASE AGAINST IVANKA TRUMP’S BUSINESS PARTNER,
IVANKA TRUMP’S BUSINESS PARTNER, FROM WHAT USED TO BE HER LUXURY
FROM WHAT USED TO BE HER LUXURY JEWELRY BRAND.
JEWELRY BRAND. TRUMP ORGANIZATION EXECUTIVE
TRUMP ORGANIZATION EXECUTIVE ALLEN WEISSELBERG IN THE CASE
ALLEN WEISSELBERG IN THE CASE RELATING TO MICHAEL COHEN IS
RELATING TO MICHAEL COHEN IS THAT THE NEW YORK STATE CASE
THAT THE NEW YORK STATE CASE THAT RELATES TO THE TRUMP
THAT RELATES TO THE TRUMP FOUNDATION.
FOUNDATION. REPORTS OF HIS POSSIBLE IMMUNITY
REPORTS OF HIS POSSIBLE IMMUNITY DEAL, AT THIS POINT THE REPORTS
DEAL, AT THIS POINT THE REPORTS ARE INTRIGUING AND A LITTLE HARD
ARE INTRIGUING AND A LITTLE HARD TO SORT OUT.
TO SORT OUT. IT IS FAIR TO SAY THAT WE DON’T
IT IS FAIR TO SAY THAT WE DON’T YET KNOW HOW MUCH TRUMP
YET KNOW HOW MUCH TRUMP ORGANIZATIONALEN WEISSELBERG,
ORGANIZATIONALEN WEISSELBERG, HOW MUCH HE’S COOPERATING,
HOW MUCH HE’S COOPERATING, WHETHER HIS IMMUNITY DEAL FREES
WHETHER HIS IMMUNITY DEAL FREES HIM UP TO TALK WITH PROSECUTORS.
HIM UP TO TALK WITH PROSECUTORS. JUST SPECIFYINGLY TO MICHAEL
JUST SPECIFYINGLY TO MICHAEL COHEN OR WHETHER HIS DEAL GIVES
COHEN OR WHETHER HIS DEAL GIVES HIM IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION ON
HIM IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION ON OTHER THINGS RELATED TO THE
OTHER THINGS RELATED TO THE PRESIDENT’S BUSINESS INTERESTS.
PRESIDENT’S BUSINESS INTERESTS. THAT’S ALL HAPPENING
THAT’S ALL HAPPENING SIMULTANEOUSLY.
SIMULTANEOUSLY. ALL OF THOSE THINGS ALL AT ONCE.
ALL OF THOSE THINGS ALL AT ONCE. THAT’S NOT EVEN GETTING INTO THE
THAT’S NOT EVEN GETTING INTO THE EMOLUMENT CASES WHICH COULD
EMOLUMENT CASES WHICH COULD RESULT WITH THE PRESIDENT’S TAX
RESULT WITH THE PRESIDENT’S TAX RETURNS, IF HIS FAMILY, HIS
RETURNS, IF HIS FAMILY, HIS BUSINESS, IF THEY HAVE ANYTHING
BUSINESS, IF THEY HAVE ANYTHING TO WORRY THAT, PARTICULARLY WHEN
TO WORRY THAT, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT COMES TO FINANCIAL CRIMES.
IT COMES TO FINANCIAL CRIMES. TAX FRAUD, ILLICIT INTERACTIONS
TAX FRAUD, ILLICIT INTERACTIONS WITH RUSSIA THAT RELATE
WITH RUSSIA THAT RELATE ULTIMATELY TO RUSSIA’S
ULTIMATELY TO RUSSIA’S INTERFERENCE IN THE ELECTION.
INTERFERENCE IN THE ELECTION. IF THEY HAVE ANYTHING TO WORRY
IF THEY HAVE ANYTHING TO WORRY ABOUT IN ALL THOSE FRONTS, YOU
ABOUT IN ALL THOSE FRONTS, YOU MIGHT IMAGINE THAT ALL OF THESE
MIGHT IMAGINE THAT ALL OF THESE RELATED ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS
RELATED ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS MIGHT START TO FEEL A LITTLE
MIGHT START TO FEEL A LITTLE CONSTRAINING TO THE PRESIDENT.
CONSTRAINING TO THE PRESIDENT. THEY MIGHT START TO SEEM A
THEY MIGHT START TO SEEM A LITTLE WORRIED.
LITTLE WORRIED. THERE’S NO SHORTAGE OF LEGAL
THERE’S NO SHORTAGE OF LEGAL JEOPARDY RIGHT NOW FOR THE
JEOPARDY RIGHT NOW FOR THE PRESIDENT, HIS FAMILY, FOR THE
PRESIDENT, HIS FAMILY, FOR THE PEOPLE AND ENTITIES THAT ARE
PEOPLE AND ENTITIES THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO HIM.
IMPORTANT TO HIM. AND HONESTLY, I MEAN, I DON’T
AND HONESTLY, I MEAN, I DON’T SAY IT LIGHTLY.
SAY IT LIGHTLY. IT IS HARD TO KNOW WHERE THE
IT IS HARD TO KNOW WHERE THE LIMITS OF LEGAL JEOPARDY MIGHT
LIMITS OF LEGAL JEOPARDY MIGHT BE.
BE. NOT JUST FOR THE PRESIDENT AND
NOT JUST FOR THE PRESIDENT AND HIS FAMILY BUT FOR THE ENTITIES
HIS FAMILY BUT FOR THE ENTITIES CLOSEST TO HIM.
CLOSEST TO HIM. I WOULD SINGLE OUT ONE LINE
I WOULD SINGLE OUT ONE LINE HERE.
HERE. I DON’T THINK THIS HAS HAD A LOT
I DON’T THINK THIS HAS HAD A LOT OF ATTENTION BUT IT STUCK WITH
OF ATTENTION BUT IT STUCK WITH ME OVER THE WEEKEND.
ME OVER THE WEEKEND. THE MORE I TALK TO PEOPLE ABOUT
THE MORE I TALK TO PEOPLE ABOUT IT.
IT. SPECIALLY MORE I TALK ON PEOPLE
SPECIALLY MORE I TALK ON PEOPLE IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM ABOUT IT,
IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM ABOUT IT, THE MORE IT STICKS OUT.
THE MORE IT STICKS OUT. THERE IS LITERALLY A LINE IN THE
THERE IS LITERALLY A LINE IN THE MICHAEL COHEN PLEA AGREEMENT
MICHAEL COHEN PLEA AGREEMENT FROM LAST WEEK WHERE FEDERAL
FROM LAST WEEK WHERE FEDERAL PROSECUTORS SPELL POUT MICHAEL
PROSECUTORS SPELL POUT MICHAEL COHEN PLEADING GUILTY IN FEDERAL
COHEN PLEADING GUILTY IN FEDERAL COURT MEANS FEDERAL PROSECUTORS
COURT MEANS FEDERAL PROSECUTORS AGREE TO NOT FURTHER PROSECUTE
AGREE TO NOT FURTHER PROSECUTE HIM.
HIM. BUT THEY EXPLICITLY SPELL OUT
BUT THEY EXPLICITLY SPELL OUT THAT THEY ARE RESERVING THE
THAT THEY ARE RESERVING THE RIGHT TO CITE THOSE SAME
RIGHT TO CITE THOSE SAME FELONIES AS CRIMES IN CASE THEY
FELONIES AS CRIMES IN CASE THEY EVER WANT TO BRING A RICO.
EVER WANT TO BRING A RICO. 18 USC 1961.
18 USC 1961. THAT’S RACKETEERING.
THAT’S RACKETEERING. THAT’S RICO AS IN ORGANIZED
THAT’S RICO AS IN ORGANIZED CRIME.
CRIME. FEDERAL PROSECUTORS ARE
FEDERAL PROSECUTORS ARE RESERVING THE RIGHT TO CHARGE
RESERVING THE RIGHT TO CHARGE SOMETHING AS AN ORGANIZED
SOMETHING AS AN ORGANIZED CRIMINAL ENTITY UNDER THE RICO
CRIMINAL ENTITY UNDER THE RICO STATUTES AND THAT RELATES TO
STATUTES AND THAT RELATES TO MICHAEL COHEN.
MICHAEL COHEN. WHAT?
WHAT? THAT HOW SOON IS PROBABLY ENOUGH
THAT HOW SOON IS PROBABLY ENOUGH TO LIGHT A LITTLE FIRE UNDER
TO LIGHT A LITTLE FIRE UNDER SOMEONE WHO BELIEVES THEY MIGHT
SOMEONE WHO BELIEVES THEY MIGHT END UP IN THE CROSS HAIRS OF ONE
END UP IN THE CROSS HAIRS OF ONE OR MORE OF THESE INVESTIGATIONS.
OR MORE OF THESE INVESTIGATIONS. BUT AMONG ALL OF THESE FOR THE
BUT AMONG ALL OF THESE FOR THE PRESIDENT’S BUSINESS AND EVEN
PRESIDENT’S BUSINESS AND EVEN HIS CHARITY, EVEN AMID ALL OF
HIS CHARITY, EVEN AMID ALL OF THAT, THE PAUL MANAFORT CASE
THAT, THE PAUL MANAFORT CASE REALLY DOES STAND OUT.
REALLY DOES STAND OUT. IT REALLY DOES STAND ALONE.
IT REALLY DOES STAND ALONE. MICHAEL FLYNN, THE PRESIDENT’S
MICHAEL FLYNN, THE PRESIDENT’S NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER PLED
NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER PLED GUILTY.
GUILTY. RICK GATES, THE DEPUTY CAMPAIGN
RICK GATES, THE DEPUTY CAMPAIGN CHAIR, ORGANIZER OF THE NAUKS,
CHAIR, ORGANIZER OF THE NAUKS, PLED GUILT YIFLT GEORGE DPAPS,
PLED GUILT YIFLT GEORGE DPAPS, PLED GUILT YIFLT PAUL MANAFORT
PLED GUILT YIFLT PAUL MANAFORT HAS NOT PLED GUILTY.
HAS NOT PLED GUILTY. HE STANDS ALONE HERE.
HE STANDS ALONE HERE. THINGS ARE HAPPENING TO HIM
THINGS ARE HAPPENING TO HIM FAST.
FAST. OF COURSE THE SAME THING THAT HE
OF COURSE THE SAME THING THAT HE PLED GUILTY IN COURT, ALMOST
PLED GUILTY IN COURT, ALMOST EXACTLY SIMULTANEOUSLY, PAUL
EXACTLY SIMULTANEOUSLY, PAUL MANAFORT WAS CONVICTED.
MANAFORT WAS CONVICTED. THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW,
THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW, WEDNESDAY OF THIS WEEK, THE
WEDNESDAY OF THIS WEEK, THE PROSECUTORS WHO CONVICTED
PROSECUTORS WHO CONVICTED MANAFORT ON THOSE EIGHT
MANAFORT ON THOSE EIGHT FELONIES, THEY’LL HAVE TO TELL
FELONIES, THEY’LL HAVE TO TELL THE COURT WHETHER THEY ARE GOING
THE COURT WHETHER THEY ARE GOING TO BRING MANAFORT BACK TO COURT
TO BRING MANAFORT BACK TO COURT TO RETRY HIM ON THE TEN FELONY
TO RETRY HIM ON THE TEN FELONY CHARGES FOR WHICH THE JURY WAS
CHARGES FOR WHICH THE JURY WAS NOT ABLE TO REACH A VERDICT.
NOT ABLE TO REACH A VERDICT. REMEMBER, IT WAS EIGHT FELONIES,
REMEMBER, IT WAS EIGHT FELONIES, CONVICTION, EIGHT FELONIES, HUNG
CONVICTION, EIGHT FELONIES, HUNG JURY.
JURY. COULDN’T COME TO CONSENSUS.
COULDN’T COME TO CONSENSUS. THE FOREPERSON OF THE JURY WENT
THE FOREPERSON OF THE JURY WENT OUT OF HIS OR HER WAY TO MAKE IT
OUT OF HIS OR HER WAY TO MAKE IT PUBLICLY KNOWN ON THE VERDICT
PUBLICLY KNOWN ON THE VERDICT SHEET ORGANIZATION THOSE TEN
SHEET ORGANIZATION THOSE TEN CHARGES WHERE THEY COULDN’T COME
CHARGES WHERE THEY COULDN’T COME THE A VERDICT, 11 OF THE 12
THE A VERDICT, 11 OF THE 12 JURORS WANTED TO CONVICT
JURORS WANTED TO CONVICT MANAFORT ON ALL OF THEM.
MANAFORT ON ALL OF THEM. ONLY ONE HOLDOUT FOR THE TEN
ONLY ONE HOLDOUT FOR THE TEN CHARGES ON WHICH THEY DIDN’T GET
CHARGES ON WHICH THEY DIDN’T GET GUILTY VERDICTS.
GUILTY VERDICTS. PROSECUTORS KNOW THAT AND THEY
PROSECUTORS KNOW THAT AND THEY HAVE RIGHT TO PUT MANAFORT ON
HAVE RIGHT TO PUT MANAFORT ON TRIAL AGAIN FOR THE TEN CHARGES
TRIAL AGAIN FOR THE TEN CHARGES WHERE THEY GOT A MISTRIAL.
WHERE THEY GOT A MISTRIAL. THEY WERE JUST ONE JUROR AWAY.
THEY WERE JUST ONE JUROR AWAY. WE’LL FIND OUT THE DAY AFTER
WE’LL FIND OUT THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW WHETHER THEY’LL TRY
TOMORROW WHETHER THEY’LL TRY MANAFORT AGAIN ON THOSE SECOND
MANAFORT AGAIN ON THOSE SECOND BASEMAN
BASEMAN BASEMAN, ON THOSE CHARGES.
BASEMAN, ON THOSE CHARGES. PROSECUTORS ARE STEAMING TOWARD
PROSECUTORS ARE STEAMING TOWARD THE NEXT TRIAL FOR MANAFORT.
THE NEXT TRIAL FOR MANAFORT. IT IS INTERESTING.
IT IS INTERESTING. A FEW DAYS AGO, THE FEDERAL
A FEW DAYS AGO, THE FEDERAL COURT IN D.C. THAT’S ABOUT TO
COURT IN D.C. THAT’S ABOUT TO START THE SECOND TRIAL FOR
START THE SECOND TRIAL FOR MANAFORT, THEY UNSEALED SOME OF
MANAFORT, THEY UNSEALED SOME OF THE EARLIER PROCEEDINGS THAT WE
THE EARLIER PROCEEDINGS THAT WE THE PUBLIC HADN’T PREVIOUSLY
THE PUBLIC HADN’T PREVIOUSLY ACCESS TO THAT LET US SEE FOR
ACCESS TO THAT LET US SEE FOR THE FIRST TIME EVEN THE JUDGE
THE FIRST TIME EVEN THE JUDGE WHO IS OVERSEEING THE NEXT PAUL
WHO IS OVERSEEING THE NEXT PAUL MANAFORT TRIAL IN D.C., THAT
MANAFORT TRIAL IN D.C., THAT JUDGE APPEARS TO BE MYSTIFIED BY
JUDGE APPEARS TO BE MYSTIFIED BY THE FACT MANAFORT DIDN’T CONSENT
THE FACT MANAFORT DIDN’T CONSENT TO ALL THE CHARGES AGAINST HIM
TO ALL THE CHARGES AGAINST HIM JUST BEING CONSOLIDATED IN ONE
JUST BEING CONSOLIDATED IN ONE JURISDICTION SO HE COULD GO ON
JURISDICTION SO HE COULD GO ON TRIAL ONCE.
TRIAL ONCE. THE REASON, THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN
THE REASON, THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN CHAIR, THE REASON HE HAD A TRIAL
CHAIR, THE REASON HE HAD A TRIAL THAT ENDED LAST WEEK AND HE’S
THAT ENDED LAST WEEK AND HE’S NOW ABOUT TO HAVE A NEW TRIAL
NOW ABOUT TO HAVE A NEW TRIAL THAT IS STARTING WITHIN THE NEXT
THAT IS STARTING WITHIN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS IS SIMPLY BECAUSE HE
FEW WEEKS IS SIMPLY BECAUSE HE DECIDED HE WANTED TWO TRIALS.
DECIDED HE WANTED TWO TRIALS. GOVERNMENT GAVE THEM CHOICE TO
GOVERNMENT GAVE THEM CHOICE TO CONSOLIDATE THEM AND GO ON TRIAL
CONSOLIDATE THEM AND GO ON TRIAL ONCEST CHOSE TO GO ON TRIAL
ONCEST CHOSE TO GO ON TRIAL TWICE.
TWICE. WHY DID HE MAKE CHOICE?
WHY DID HE MAKE CHOICE? WE DON’T KNOW.
WE DON’T KNOW. NEITHER DOES THE JUDGE IN HIS
NEITHER DOES THE JUDGE IN HIS CASE.
CASE. THIS IS FROM THE NEWLY UNSEALED
THIS IS FROM THE NEWLY UNSEALED COURT TRANSCRIPT IN MANAFORT’S
COURT TRANSCRIPT IN MANAFORT’S CASE FROM FEBRUARY 14th IN
CASE FROM FEBRUARY 14th IN WASHINGTON, D.C.
WASHINGTON, D.C. THIS IS JUDGE IN MANAFORT’S D.C.
THIS IS JUDGE IN MANAFORT’S D.C. CASE TALKING TO MANAFORT’S
CASE TALKING TO MANAFORT’S DEFENSE LAWYERS.
DEFENSE LAWYERS. AND BEFORE THIS WAS JUST
AND BEFORE THIS WAS JUST UNSEALED, THIS WAS A SEALED
UNSEALED, THIS WAS A SEALED PROCEEDING AT THE BASE.
PROCEEDING AT THE BASE. NOW WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED.
NOW WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED. THE JUDGE SAYS, QUOTE, I
THE JUDGE SAYS, QUOTE, I UNDERSTAND YOU’RE HAMSTRUNG.
UNDERSTAND YOU’RE HAMSTRUNG. IS THERE ANY GHANG THE EASTERN
IS THERE ANY GHANG THE EASTERN DISTRICT VERSUS THE DISTRICT OF
DISTRICT VERSUS THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA?
COLUMBIA? I THINK THE ONLY THING I CAN
I THINK THE ONLY THING I CAN IMAGINE THAT’S MORE UNUSUAL THAN
IMAGINE THAT’S MORE UNUSUAL THAN THE GOVERNMENT OFFERING THAT YOU
THE GOVERNMENT OFFERING THAT YOU CHOICE IS THE CHOICE YOU’RE
CHOICE IS THE CHOICE YOU’RE MAKING.
MAKING. BUT IS THERE ANY FURTHER
BUT IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT?
DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT? MANAFORT’S DEFENSE LAWYER SAYS
MANAFORT’S DEFENSE LAWYER SAYS NO.
NO. AND THEN JUDGE SAYS, OKAY.
AND THEN JUDGE SAYS, OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
ALL RIGHT. THE JUDGE IS SAYING, ARE YOU
THE JUDGE IS SAYING, ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT YOUR CLIENT TO GO
SURE YOU WANT YOUR CLIENT TO GO ON TRIAL TWICE?
ON TRIAL TWICE? YOU WANT TWO FEDERAL FELONY
YOU WANT TWO FEDERAL FELONY TRIALS?
TRIALS? THE JUDGE IS SAYING TO THE
THE JUDGE IS SAYING TO THE DEFENSE LAWYERS, LISTEN,
DEFENSE LAWYERS, LISTEN, PROSECUTORS NEVER GIVE ANYBODY
PROSECUTORS NEVER GIVE ANYBODY THE OPTION TO DROP ONE OF THEIR
THE OPTION TO DROP ONE OF THEIR TRIALS.
TRIALS. THEY’RE GIVING YOU THE OPTION TO
THEY’RE GIVING YOU THE OPTION TO JUST GO ON TRIAL ONCE.
JUST GO ON TRIAL ONCE. ARE YOU SURE YOU’RE NOT WILLING
ARE YOU SURE YOU’RE NOT WILLING TO TAKE THEM UP ON IT?
TO TAKE THEM UP ON IT? THE DEFENSE LAWYER IS YEP, YOUR
THE DEFENSE LAWYER IS YEP, YOUR HONOR, WE’RE STICKING WITH THE
HONOR, WE’RE STICKING WITH THE PLAN.
PLAN. TWO TRIALS.
TWO TRIALS. THE JUDGE IS LIKE, OKAY, YOUR
THE JUDGE IS LIKE, OKAY, YOUR FUNERAL.
FUNERAL. HERE WE GO.
HERE WE GO. SO THIS SECOND TRIAL IS ABOUT TO
SO THIS SECOND TRIAL IS ABOUT TO START.
START. AND IT’S WEIRD.
AND IT’S WEIRD. AND IT WILL HAPPEN BEFORE THE
AND IT WILL HAPPEN BEFORE THE JUDGE WHO FINDS IT REMARKABLE.
JUDGE WHO FINDS IT REMARKABLE. IN THE JUDGE’S WORDS, UNUSUAL
IN THE JUDGE’S WORDS, UNUSUAL THAT MANAFORT HAS DECIDED TO
THAT MANAFORT HAS DECIDED TO HAVE A SECOND TRIAL.
HAVE A SECOND TRIAL. INCIDENTALLY, THIS WILL WHO WILL
INCIDENTALLY, THIS WILL WHO WILL BE PRESIDING IN THE TRIAL IS THE
BE PRESIDING IN THE TRIAL IS THE SAME JUDGE WHO ORDERED PAUL
SAME JUDGE WHO ORDERED PAUL MANAFORT HELD IN JAIL INSTEAD OF
MANAFORT HELD IN JAIL INSTEAD OF HOUSE ARREST BECAUSE OF THE
HOUSE ARREST BECAUSE OF THE ALLEGATIONS THAT HE WAS
ALLEGATIONS THAT HE WAS TAMPERING WITH WITNESSES WHILE
TAMPERING WITH WITNESSES WHILE HE WAS OUT ON BAIL.
HE WAS OUT ON BAIL. SO THIS NEXT CASE FOR MANAFORT
SO THIS NEXT CASE FOR MANAFORT IS NOT PROMISING FOR A LOT OF
IS NOT PROMISING FOR A LOT OF REASONS.
REASONS. BUT IT WILL ALSO BE
BUT IT WILL ALSO BE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT FROM THE
SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT FROM THE CASE IN VIRGINIA WHERE HE JUST
CASE IN VIRGINIA WHERE HE JUST GOT CONVICTED ON EIGHT FELONIES.
GOT CONVICTED ON EIGHT FELONIES. WE KNOW ABOUT IN PART FROM THE
WE KNOW ABOUT IN PART FROM THE 1,500 PIECES OF EVIDENCE THAT
1,500 PIECES OF EVIDENCE THAT THEY HAVE FOR MANAFORT.
THEY HAVE FOR MANAFORT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT’S
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT’S DIFFERENT IS THAT AT LEAST SOME
DIFFERENT IS THAT AT LEAST SOME OF THE EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE
OF THE EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE THAT THEY’LL BE CITING IS
THAT THEY’LL BE CITING IS APPARENTLY IN RUSSIAN.
APPARENTLY IN RUSSIAN. LOOK.
LOOK. AT LEAST THE SUBJECT LINES OF
AT LEAST THE SUBJECT LINES OF ALL OF THESE E-MAILS THAT APPEAR
ALL OF THESE E-MAILS THAT APPEAR IN THE PROSECUTION’S LIST, THIS
IN THE PROSECUTION’S LIST, THIS IS THE TRIAL WHERE MANAFORT HAS
IS THE TRIAL WHERE MANAFORT HAS A CO-DEFENDANT ON SOME OF THE
A CO-DEFENDANT ON SOME OF THE CHARGES.
CHARGES. HIS CO-DEFENDANT IS KONSTANTIN
HIS CO-DEFENDANT IS KONSTANTIN KILIMNIK.
KILIMNIK. HE IS BELIEVED TO BE ASSOCIATED
HE IS BELIEVED TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE.
WITH RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE. HE IS BELIEVED TO BE HIDING IN
HE IS BELIEVED TO BE HIDING IN RUSSIA RATHER THAN FACE THESE
RUSSIA RATHER THAN FACE THESE CHARGES.
CHARGES. IN ADDITION TO BEING LISTED AS
IN ADDITION TO BEING LISTED AS MANAFORT’S CO-DEFENDANT, HE
MANAFORT’S CO-DEFENDANT, HE APPEARS HERE IN THE EVIDENCE
APPEARS HERE IN THE EVIDENCE LIST.
LIST. ITEM NUMBER 1194.
ITEM NUMBER 1194. KK WE BELIEVE IS THE NICKNAME
KK WE BELIEVE IS THE NICKNAME FOR HIM AND THAT’S THE WAY
FOR HIM AND THAT’S THE WAY MANAFORT REFERRED TO HIM.
MANAFORT REFERRED TO HIM. THERE ARE ALSO THESE COUPLE
THERE ARE ALSO THESE COUPLE REFERENCES WHO WE BELIEVE MAY TO
REFERENCES WHO WE BELIEVE MAY TO BE A RUSSIAN OLIGARCH WHO IS
BE A RUSSIAN OLIGARCH WHO IS KNOWN TO BE VERY CLOSE TO
KNOWN TO BE VERY CLOSE TO VLADIMIR PUTIN AND IS KNOWN TO
VLADIMIR PUTIN AND IS KNOWN TO HAVE EXTENSIVE BUSINESS
HAVE EXTENSIVE BUSINESS DEALINGS.
DEALINGS. HIS NAME IS OLEG DARE PASSKA.
HIS NAME IS OLEG DARE PASSKA. WE’LL HAVE MORE ON HIS ROLE.
WE’LL HAVE MORE ON HIS ROLE. THIS WAS ALWAYS GOING TO BE A
THIS WAS ALWAYS GOING TO BE A DIFFICULT PROSPECT FOR HIM.
DIFFICULT PROSPECT FOR HIM. YOU DON’T HAVE THE WIND AT YOUR
YOU DON’T HAVE THE WIND AT YOUR BACK HAD YOU’RE COMING OFF EIGHT
BACK HAD YOU’RE COMING OFF EIGHT CONVICTIONS.
CONVICTIONS. EIGHT FELONY FEDERAL CONVICTIONS
EIGHT FELONY FEDERAL CONVICTIONS RIGHT BEFORE YOU START A NEW
RIGHT BEFORE YOU START A NEW TRIAL ON SEVEN MORE COUNTS.
TRIAL ON SEVEN MORE COUNTS. IN TERMS OF THE PRESIDENT’S
IN TERMS OF THE PRESIDENT’S LEGAL JEOPARDY THOUGH, THIS
LEGAL JEOPARDY THOUGH, THIS SECOND MANAFORT TRIAL HAS GOT A
SECOND MANAFORT TRIAL HAS GOT A LOT OF RUSSIAN STUFF IN IT.
LOT OF RUSSIAN STUFF IN IT. IT IS A LOT CLOSER TO THE
IT IS A LOT CLOSER TO THE ORIGINAL CONCERNS RELATED TO
ORIGINAL CONCERNS RELATED TO RUSSIA THAT STARTED THE SPECIAL
RUSSIA THAT STARTED THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION IN THE
COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION IN THE FIRST PLACE.
FIRST PLACE. AFTER INITIAL REPORTS LAST WEEK
AFTER INITIAL REPORTS LAST WEEK STOKED IN PART BY THE PRESIDENT
STOKED IN PART BY THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF THAT HE MIGHT BE
HIMSELF THAT HE MIGHT BE CONSIDERING A PARDON FOR PAUL
CONSIDERING A PARDON FOR PAUL MANAFORT, FOLLOWING HIS
MANAFORT, FOLLOWING HIS CONVICTION IN VIRGINIA, TONIGHT
CONVICTION IN VIRGINIA, TONIGHT GABRIEL SHERMAN REPORTS AT
GABRIEL SHERMAN REPORTS AT "VANITY FAIR".COM THAT THE
"VANITY FAIR".COM THAT THE PRESIDENT IS SO COMMITTED TO THE
PRESIDENT IS SO COMMITTED TO THE IDEA OF PARDONING PAUL MANAFORT
IDEA OF PARDONING PAUL MANAFORT NOW THAT HE IS WILLING TO DO IT
NOW THAT HE IS WILLING TO DO IT EVEN OVER THE OBJECTIONS OF HIS
EVEN OVER THE OBJECTIONS OF HIS WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL DON McIGAN.
WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL DON McIGAN. THE PRESIDENT HAS SAID HE IS
THE PRESIDENT HAS SAID HE IS CONSIDERING BRINGING IN A NEW
CONSIDERING BRINGING IN A NEW LAWYER TO DRAFT A MANAFORT
LAWYER TO DRAFT A MANAFORT PARDON IF McGAHN WON’T DO IT.
PARDON IF McGAHN WON’T DO IT. IN THAT CONTEXT TONIGHT, THE
IN THAT CONTEXT TONIGHT, THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL" REPORTS
"WALL STREET JOURNAL" REPORTS THAT HE WAS TRYING TO DO A DEAL.
THAT HE WAS TRYING TO DO A DEAL. MANAFORT WHO WOULD NOT FLIP.
MANAFORT WHO WOULD NOT FLIP. MANAFORT, THE GUY GOING ALL THE
MANAFORT, THE GUY GOING ALL THE WAY TO TRIAL OF NOT ONCE BUT
WAY TO TRIAL OF NOT ONCE BUT TWICE, THE ONE GUY IMPLICATED IN
TWICE, THE ONE GUY IMPLICATED IN THE TRUMP/RUSSIA SCANDAL WHO
THE TRUMP/RUSSIA SCANDAL WHO ABSOLUTELY WOULD NOT DO A DEAL
ABSOLUTELY WOULD NOT DO A DEAL WITH PROSECUTORS AND WAS PRAISED
WITH PROSECUTORS AND WAS PRAISED BY THE PRESIDENT FOR THAT,
BY THE PRESIDENT FOR THAT, MANAFORT HAS APPARENTLY TRYING
MANAFORT HAS APPARENTLY TRYING TO DO A DEAL WITH PROSECUTORS.
TO DO A DEAL WITH PROSECUTORS. ACCORDING TO THE REPORTER AT THE
ACCORDING TO THE REPORTER AT THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL,"
"WALL STREET JOURNAL," MANAFORT’S DEFENSE TEAM STARTED
MANAFORT’S DEFENSE TEAM STARTED CONVERSATIONS WITH MUELLER’S
CONVERSATIONS WITH MUELLER’S PROSECUTORS ABOUT A POTENTIAL
PROSECUTORS ABOUT A POTENTIAL PLEA DEAL WHILE THE VIRGINIA
PLEA DEAL WHILE THE VIRGINIA JURY WAS DELIBERATING OVER
JURY WAS DELIBERATING OVER MANAFORT’S FATE IN HIS FIRST
MANAFORT’S FATE IN HIS FIRST TRIAL.
TRIAL. QUOTE, PAUL MANAFORT’S DEFENSE
QUOTE, PAUL MANAFORT’S DEFENSE TEAM HELD TALKS WITH PROSECUTORS
TEAM HELD TALKS WITH PROSECUTORS TO RESOLVE A SECOND SET OF
TO RESOLVE A SECOND SET OF CHARGES AGAINST THE FORMER
CHARGES AGAINST THE FORMER CAMPAIGN CHAIR.
CAMPAIGN CHAIR. THE PLEA DISCUSSIONS OCCURRED AS
THE PLEA DISCUSSIONS OCCURRED AS A VIRGINIA JURY WAS SPENDING
A VIRGINIA JURY WAS SPENDING FOUR DAYS DELIBERATING TAX AND
FOUR DAYS DELIBERATING TAX AND BANK FRAUD CHARGES AGAINST
BANK FRAUD CHARGES AGAINST MANAFORT.
MANAFORT. THE TALKS BETWEEN THE DEFENSE
THE TALKS BETWEEN THE DEFENSE TEAM AND PROSECUTORS WERE AIMED
TEAM AND PROSECUTORS WERE AIMED AT FORESTALLING A SECOND TRIAL
AT FORESTALLING A SECOND TRIAL FOR MANAFORT WHICH IS SCHEDULED
FOR MANAFORT WHICH IS SCHEDULED TO BEGIN ON SEPTEMBER 17th.
TO BEGIN ON SEPTEMBER 17th. ALTHOUGH PAUL MANAFORT AND HIS
ALTHOUGH PAUL MANAFORT AND HIS DEFENSE TEAM STARTED THOSE TALKS
DEFENSE TEAM STARTED THOSE TALKS WITH THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR’S
WITH THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE, IT DID NOT RESULT IN A
OFFICE, IT DID NOT RESULT IN A DEAL.
DEAL. AND THIS IS WHERE IT GETS VERY
AND THIS IS WHERE IT GETS VERY INTRIGUING.
INTRIGUING. THE PLEA TALKS ON THE SECOND SET
THE PLEA TALKS ON THE SECOND SET OF CHARGES STALLED OVER ISSUES
OF CHARGES STALLED OVER ISSUES RAISED BY SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT
RAISED BY SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER.
MUELLER. WHAT ISSUES?
WHAT ISSUES? QUOTE, IT ISN’T CLEAR WHAT THOSE
QUOTE, IT ISN’T CLEAR WHAT THOSE ISSUES WERE AND THE PROPOSED
ISSUES WERE AND THE PROPOSED TERMS OF THE WOULD BE PLEA DEAL
TERMS OF THE WOULD BE PLEA DEAL COULD NOT IMMEDIATELY BE
COULD NOT IMMEDIATELY BE DETERMINED.
DETERMINED. AS THE PRESIDENT OPENLY MULLS
AS THE PRESIDENT OPENLY MULLS THE PROSPECT OF PARDONING PAUL
THE PROSPECT OF PARDONING PAUL MANAFORT TO GET HIM OUT OF THIS
MANAFORT TO GET HIM OUT OF THIS LEGAL CORNER OF A MESS THAT HE’S
LEGAL CORNER OF A MESS THAT HE’S IN, DOES THIS MEAN THAT PAUL
IN, DOES THIS MEAN THAT PAUL MANAFORT WAS OFFERING TO
MANAFORT WAS OFFERING TO COOPERATE WITH PROSECUTORS FOR
COOPERATE WITH PROSECUTORS FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER?
THE FIRST TIME EVER? COULD THIS MEAN THAT HE WASN’T
COULD THIS MEAN THAT HE WASN’T OFFERING TO COOPERATE BUT HIS
OFFERING TO COOPERATE BUT HIS DEFENSE TEAM WAS NEVERTHELESS,
DEFENSE TEAM WAS NEVERTHELESS, TRYING TO MAKE HIS SECOND TRIAL
TRYING TO MAKE HIS SECOND TRIAL GO AWAY?
GO AWAY? IF THEY WEREN’T OPERATING, IF
IF THEY WEREN’T OPERATING, IF THEY WEREN’T OFFERING HIS
THEY WEREN’T OFFERING HIS COOPERATION IN EXCHANGE FOR
COOPERATION IN EXCHANGE FOR MAKING THOSE CHARGES GO AWAY,
MAKING THOSE CHARGES GO AWAY, WHAT ELSE WOULD THEY HAVE TO
WHAT ELSE WOULD THEY HAVE TO OFFER?
OFFER? THERE ARE WAYS TO FIGURE OUT THE
