PRESIDENT OBAMA. AND MARK THOMPSON IS A RADIO
HOST WITH ZIRIOUSSIRIUS XM PROGR
LET ME PLAY WHAT GIULIANI SAID
ON JUNE 3rd ON "MEET THE PRESS."
HE WAS TALKING ABOUT THE
POSSIBILITY OF PRESIDENT TRUMP
STEPPING IN AND ENDING AN
INVESTIGATION LIKE THIS.
>> THAT’S A VERY UNREALISTIC
THING.
THING. IF YOU’RE ASKING IN A
THEORETICAL SENSE IT COULD LEAD
TO IMPEACHMENT.
TO IMPEACHMENT. I MEAN, IF HE TERMINATED AN
INVESTIGATION OF HIMSELF, IT
COULD LEAD TO ALL SORTS OF
CONSEQUENCES.
CONSEQUENCES. >> CONSTITUTIONALLY, YOU’RE
MAKING THE ARGUMENT YOU THINK
CONSTITUTIONALLY HE COULD.
IS WHAT YOU’RE SAYING.
>> I’M SAYING CONSTITUTIONALLY,
IT SURE LOCKS THAT WAY.
>> SO, NED, YOU’VE GOT RUDY
GIULIANI SAYING THAT WE TALKED
TO A FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR
IN THE DOJ AND ASKED HIM, HE
SAID THE PRESIDENT COULD DO IT.
HE COULD STEP IN.
HE SAID THE QUESTION IS WHETHER
IT’S LAWFUL OR DOES IT HAVE A
CORRUPT PURPOSE.
CORRUPT PURPOSE. AND THAT QUESTION WOULD LIKELY
BE DECIDED BY THE COURTS.
WHAT DO YOU THINK IS GOING ON
HERE?
HERE? WHAT’S YOUR ANSWER TO THAT
QUESTION?
QUESTION? COULD HE STOP IT IF HE WANTED
TO?
TO? >> WELL, YES, CHRIS, BOTH THE
FEATURE AND FLAW OF OUR SYSTEM
IS THAT THERE IS VERY LITTLE
THAT IS WRITTEN SPECIFICALLY
INTO THE CONSTITUTION, INTO LAW,
INTO STATUTE.
INTO STATUTE. MUCH OF THIS IS BASED ON NORMS.
NORMS THAT ARE PREVIOUS 44
PRESIDENTS, ALL GOOD PEOPLE FOR
THE MOST PART, HAVE OBSERVED AND
ADHERED TO.
ADHERED TO. WE NOW HAVE A PRESIDENT WHO IS
WILLING TO FLOUT THESE NORMS.
THESE NORMS OF AMERICAN SOCIETY.
THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE FOUND
OURSELVES IN THIS POSITION.
YES, I THINK TECHNICALLY THE
PRESIDENT COULD STEP IN.
THE FACT, THOUGH, IS HE WOULD
PROBABLY DO SO IN AN EFFORT TO
OBSTRUCT JUSTICE WITH MALIGN
INTENT TO EXONERATE HIMSELF.
SO I THINK THAT IS WHERE THIS
WOULD VIOLATE WHAT WE HAVE
OBSERVED FOR THE 240-SOME YEARS
OF OUR REPUBLIC.
THE OTHER QUESTION IS WE HAVE
FOCUSED SO MUCH ON THE
PRESIDENT’S ASSERTION HE COULD
RUN THIS INVESTIGATION THAT WE
HAVE OVERLOOKED HIS STATEMENT HE
HAS STAYED OUT OF IT TO DATE.
AND THAT IS FALSE --
>> WE JUST PLAYED THAT SOUND OF
HIM.
HIM. WE COULD PLAY, THE ENTIRE HOUR,
OF SOUND OF HIM TALKING ABOUT
AND CRITICIZING THIS
INVESTIGATION.
INVESTIGATION. >> WE HAVE THE MUELLER PROBE IN
THE FIRST PLACE BECAUSE DONALD
TRUMP FIRED JIM COMEY WITH
RUSSIA IN MIND.
HE’S CONTINUED TO HARANGUE THE
PROSECUTIONS.
PROSECUTIONS. HE’S TAMPERED WITH WITNESSES BY
ENCOURAGING PAUL MANAFORT TO
STAY STRONG.
STAY STRONG. >> NOT ONLY THAT, BUT SUSAN,
JUST THE IDEA, AGAIN, EVEN IF HE
CAN DO IT LEGALLY IF THERE
AREN’T ANY STRONG RESTRICTIONS
ON IT.
ON IT. A PRESIDENT DECIDING TO END THE
INVESTIGATION THAT ESSENTIALLY
IS ABOUT HIS ELECTION.
>> I THINK HE WOULD HAVE A
TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF BACKLASH.
EVEN THOUGH THE REPUBLICANS HAVE
BEEN HANDS OFF WITH THIS
PRESIDENT, I THINK THAT’S A
BRIDGE TOO FAR.
I DO NOT THINK HE’LL GO THAT
FAR.
FAR. >> DO YOU THINK HE WOULD DO IT?
DO YOU THINK HE’S JUST TALKING?
DONALD TRUMP LIKES TO TALK.
HE LIKES TO TALK ABOUT HOW MUCH
POWER HE HAS.
>> HE LIKES TO TALK ABOUT HOW
MUCH POWER HE HAS BECAUSE HE
THINKS IT MAKES HIM LOOK STRONG.
LIKE I CAN TAKE CARE OF THIS.
IN FACT, IT HAS THE OPPOSITE
EFFECT.
EFFECT. IT MAKES HIM LOOK WEAK AND
PETTY, THAT HE’S BASICALLY
PUNCHING DOWN.
PUNCHING DOWN. SO DO I THINK HE WOULD DO IT?
IF HIS BACK WAS AGAINST THE
WALL, IF THEY START FINDING OUT
THINGS AND I THINK THAT’S WHAT
HE’S MOST AFRAID OF, YOU HAVE
THE DON McGAHN INTERVIEW.
YOU HAVE OMAROSA WITH TAPES.
YOU HAVE MICHAEL COHEN LOOKING
TO MAKE A DEAL WITH TAPES.
I THINK THIS PRESIDENT IS
AFRAID.
AFRAID. HE’S A CORNERED ANIMAL.
AND HE WILL DO ANYTHING TO
SURVIVE.
SURVIVE. >> MARK, I GUESS, YOU KNOW, YOU
HAVE THE PRESIDENT TO THE POINT
OF ALWAYS WANT TO LOOK STRONG.
SAYING I WANT TO TALK TO THE
SPECIAL PROSECUTOR.
SPECIAL PROSECUTOR. I HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE.
AND THAT HE THINKS HE CAN
CONVINCE ALMOST ANYBODY OF
ANYTHING.
ANYTHING. HE BELIEVED HE COULD GO IN THERE
OR SUGGESTED TO PEOPLE, I CAN GO
IN THERE AND I CAN HELP HIM TO
SEE THAT I HAVE NOT DONE
ANYTHING WRONG.
ANYTHING WRONG. SO NOW HE SAYS HE’S AFRAID OF
THE PERJURY TRAP.
HAVE HIS LAWYERS GOTTEN TO HIM?
AND SOME OF HIS AIDES?
OR DO YOU THINK HE NEVER
INTENDED TO TALK TO MUELLER AT
ALL?
ALL? >> I THINK DONALD TRUMP
PERSONALLY IS SO NARCISSISTIC,
HE PROBABLY THINKS HE CAN TALK
HIS WAY OUT OF THIS.
I THINK IT’S MORE THE FORMER YOU
MENTIONED, HIS ATTORNEYS HAVE
PROBABLY CON VIBSED HIM THAT
THIS IS QUESTIONABLE AND MAYBE
EVEN A PERJURY TRAP.
YOU CAN’T BE TRAPPED INTO
PERJURY IF YOU’RE NOT
SUSCEPTIBLE TO LYING.
NONE OF US WOULD BE SUSCEPTIBLE
TO PERJURY.
TO PERJURY. WE’D JUST GO IN AND TELL THE
TRUTH.
TRUTH. I THINK WHAT HE’S DONE WITH THIS
WHOLE THING ABOUT RUNNING IT IF
HE WANTS TO.
IT’S ANOTHER WAY FOR HIM TO
DISTRACT AND TRY TO CONTROL THE
NARRATIVE.
NARRATIVE. THE WHOLE LIST THAT SUSAN GAVE.
FROM COHEN TO OMAROSA.
AND THEN EVEN MORE RECENTLY.
YOU HAVE AN ESTEEMED FORMER HEAD
OF THE CIA SAYING HE’S A TRADER
BASICALLY AND TRYING TO BURN THE
COUNTRY DOWN.
COUNTRY DOWN. YOU ALSO HAVE -- HE CAN TROY TO
SPIN IT TO THE BASE AS MUCH AS
HE WANTS TO.
BUT YOU HAVE SORT OF A
RESURRECTION OF THE JOHN DEAN
AFFAIR.
AFFAIR. YOU HAVE DON McGAHN TALKING TO
MUELLER.
MUELLER. I DON’T CARE WHAT DON McGAHN’S
LAWYER SAYS ABOUT IT NOT BEING
INCRIMINATE
INCRIMINATE INCRIMINATING.
INCRIMINATING. HE SAYS WHAT WE ALREADY KNOW.
HE HAD TO THREATEN TO RESIGN TO
PREVENT TRUMP FROM FORMING HIM
TO FIRE MUELLER.
THAT’S INCRIMINATING ON ITS OWN
FACE.
FACE. I THINK ALL OF THIS, AGAIN, IS A
WAY FOR HIM TO TRY TO CONVINCE
THOSE WHO STILL SUPPORT HIM THAT
HE’S STILL IN SOME TYPE OF
CONTROL WHEN HE ABSOLUTELY IS
NOT.
NOT. I AGREE WITH SUSAN.
HE MIGHT VERY WELL TRY TO FIRE
MUELLER, FIRE ROSENSTEIN.
I THINK WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND
BRACE OURSELVES FOR A
CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS.
CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS. >> DON McGAHN IS SUCH AN
INTERESTING PIECE OF THIS,
RIGHT, IN THE 30 HOURS THAT HE
TALKED TO MUELLER’S TEAM OVER
SIX MONTHS I GUESS, THREE
SEPARATE DAYS.
SEPARATE DAYS. HIS LAWYER, McGAHN’S LAWYERS,
TOLD "THE WASHINGTON POST" THAT
McGAHN DID NOT IN ANY WAY
INCRIMINATE THE PRESIDENT.
DO YOU THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO
SAY HE’S NOT A PROBLEM, THAT HE
DID NOTHING TO HURT THE
PRESIDENT?
PRESIDENT? WE DON’T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED IN
THERE.
THERE. WE DON’T KNOW WHAT BLANKS DON
McGAHN HAS FILLED IN FOR ROBERT
MUELLER.
MUELLER. >> THAT’S RIGHT.
WE ALSO DON’T KNOW WHAT OTHER
LINES OF QUESTIONING TO OTHER
PEOPLE THAT DON McGAHN’S
TESTIMONY OPENED UP TO MUELLER.
AND THAT’S WHERE WE’RE ALWAYS,
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO REMEMBER
MUELLER’S ABOUT THREE TO SIX
MONTHS AHEAD OF WHAT WE KNOW
TODAY.
TODAY. THAT TESTIMONY WAS GIVEN QUITE
SOME TIME AGO.
I THINK McGAHN WAS LOYAL TO HIS
OATH OF OFFICE.
LOYAL TO COUNTRY.
AND HE SPOKE AS THE LAWYER TO
THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT.
HE DID NOT SPEAK AS DONALD
TRUMP’S PERSONAL ATTORNEY AND
THAT’S A VERY IMPORTANT
DIFFERENCE.
DIFFERENCE. >> ONE OF THE THINGS -- I MEAN,
YOU KNOW, THE PRESIDENT SAID
LOOK, OF COURSE I SAID McGAHN
SHOULD, YOU KNOW, SPEAK BECAUSE
I HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE.
PART OF HIS WHOLE FEELING, YOU
KNOW, THAT HE IS IN CONTROL.
HE WANTED TO MAKE VERY CLEAR
THAT THAT WAS HIS DECISION.
HE ALSO KEEPS TALKING NOW ABOUT
TAKING AWAY SECURITY CLEARANCES.
HE SUGGESTED EVEN JAMES CLAPPER
MIGHT BE BEING NICE TO HIM
BECAUSE HE WANTS TO KEEP HIS OWN
SECURITY CLEARANCE.
SECURITY CLEARANCE. HE ALSO TWEETED ABOUT AN
INTERVIEW THAT FORMER FBI
OFFICIAL PHIL MUDD DID ON CABLE
NEWS.
NEWS. TAKE A WATCH OF THIS.
>> WHEN I AM REQUESTED TO SIT ON
ADVISORY BOARD, LET ME ASK YOU
ONE QUESTION.
ONE QUESTION. HOW MUCH DO YOU THINK I’M PAID
TO DO THAT AT THE REQUEST OF THE
U.S. GOVERNMENT?
U.S. GOVERNMENT? GIVE ME ONE ANSWER AND YOU’VE
GOT TEN SECONDS.
HOW MUCH?
HOW MUCH? >> I’LL GIVE -- I’LL ASK YOU A
QUESTION.
QUESTION. HOW MUCH ARE YOU PAID FOR
EXPOSING YOUR CONTRACTING GIGS,
FOR BEING A --
>> I HAVE NO CONTRACTS WITH THE
U.S. GOVERNMENT THAT PAY MONEY,
ZERO.
ZERO. >> WHEN YOU HAVE A SECURITY
CLEARANCE --
CLEARANCE -- >> I HAVE ZERO RELATIONSHIPS
WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR THAT
INVOLVE MY SECURITY CLEARANCE,
ZERO.
ZERO. >> THEN THE PRESIDENT WHO
OBVIOUSLY WAS WATCHING TWEETED,
JUST WATCHED FORMER INTELLIGENCE
OFFICIAL PHILLIP MUDD BECOME
TOTALLY UNGLUED AND WEIRD WHILE
DEBATING JOHN BRENNAN’S SECURITY
CLEARANCE.
CLEARANCE. MUDD IS IN NO MENTAL CONDITION
TO HAVE SUCH A CLEARANCE, SHOULD
IT BE REVOKED.
BESIDES, NED, JUST THAT THAT’S
HOW THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES IS SPENDING HIS TIME
WATCHING CABLE AND THEN
ESSENTIALLY DOING A LIVE IN TIME
COMMENTARY ON THAT.
I MEAN, IS THAT WHERE WE ARE?
HE’S JUST PICKING PEOPLE TO
THREATEN?
THREATEN? DOES THIS SUPPORT THE ARGUMENT
HE’S USING SECURITY CLEARANCES
SIMPLY AS A WEAPON AGAINST HIS
CRITICS, NOT BECAUSE SOME OF
THOSE PEOPLE MIGHT, IN SO MANY
WAY, BE LEAKERS OR POSE A THREAT
TO NATIONAL SECURITY?
>> YES.
>> YES. THE
THE THE ANSWER TO THAT IS YES,
ABSOLUTELY, IS100%.
ABSOLUTELY, IS100%. DONALD TRUMP SHOULD BE CAREFUL
OF HAVING UNGLUED AND WEIRD AS
THE BAROMETER FOR REMOVAL OF
SECURITY CLEARANCE.
SECURITY CLEARANCE. PASSION THAT PHIL MUDD HAD
DEDICATED, PASSION THAT PHIL
MUDD HAD CHANNELED TO SERVICE OF
HIS COUNTRY OVER THE COURSE OF
DECADE
DECADE DECADES.
DECADES. BUT WHAT WE’VE SEEN FROM THE
PRESIDENT IS NOT AN
UNDERSTANDING THAT SECURITY
CLEARANCES ARE NOT SOMETHING
THAT GO ONLY TO YOUR DEFENDERS,
TO YOUR CHAMPIONS.
THESE ARE WHAT FORMER OFFICIALS
HAVE SO THAT THEY CAN CONSULT,
THEY CAN SHARE THEIR KNOWLEDGE,
THEY CAN WORK AND CONTINUE TO
WORK ON THE HARDEST, THE MOST
CHALLENGING PROBLEMS WE FACE AS
A NATION WITH THEIR CURRENT
COLLEAGUES.
COLLEAGUES. WITH THOSE WHO REMAIN IN THE
INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY.
INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY. IN THE LAW ENFORCEMENT
COMMUNITY.
COMMUNITY. BUT YOU’RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
THIS PRESIDENT SEES IT AS A
POLITICAL REWARD AND HE IS
SEEING THE REMOVAL OF SECURITY
CLEARANCE AS PUNISHMENT, AS A
CHILLING SIGNAL TO ALL OF THOSE,
ALL OF THOSE WHO WOULD CRITICIZE
HIM AND WHO WOULD FIND FAULT
WITH WHAT HE IS DOING, AND