PROFESSOR IF YOU
PROFESSOR TURLEY CAN WEIGH
IN AS WELL.
WHEN WE GOT THE NOTICE FROM
THE JUDGE THAT THERE WAS AN
ORDER, THE JUDGE SAID THAT
THERE WERE TWO DOCUMENTS,
ONE WOULD BE COMPLETELY
UNDER SEAL, SO NOT PUBLIC.
AND THE SECOND WOULD BE
PUBLIC BUT WITH THESE HEAVY
REDACTIONS.
IF YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE
DATES IN THE PUBLIC DOCUMENT
WITH REDACTIONS, WHAT YOU
SEE IS EVERYTHING IS IN THIS
POST ELECTION PERIOD POST
ADMINISTRATION PERIOD.
MOST GUILTY PLEA FROM MAN
MANAFORT.
SO LARGELY 2018 ALLEGATIONS
OF WITNESS TAMPERING AS WELL
AS CONTACT WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION SOMETIMES
DIRECTLY OR THROUGH A THIRD
PARTY, WHICH THEY SAY
VIOLATED THE AGREEMENT.
I THINK IT’S WORTH
CONSIDERING WHETHER THE
DOCUMENT THAT IS UNDER SEAL
ACTUALLY RELATES TO WHAT I
WOULD CALL THE CORE TIME
FRAME ON THESE ALLEGATIONS
OF COLLUSION, WHICH IS THE
CAMPAIGN PERIOD AND THEN
THIS TRANSITION PERIOD.
I KNOW THROUGH MY OWN
REPORTING THAT THE SPECIAL
COUNSEL HAS BEEN PRESSING
PAUL MANAFORT VERY HARD ON
THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING IN
JUNE OF 2016.
YOU WILL RECALL THE RUSSIANS
TRIED TO GET THE MEETING
OFFERING DIRT ON HILLARY
CLINTON BUT THE REAL
OBJECTIVE WAS TO TRY AND GET
THESE SANCTIONS REPEALED THE
MAGNITSKY ACT AND EACH IF
YOU RECALL JARED KUSHNER, I
BELIEVE, TESTIFIED THAT HE
HAD AN ASSISTANT SEND AN
EMAIL TO HIM SO HE HAD AN
EXCUSE TO GET OFF THE
MEETING HE FELT IT WAS SUCH
A WASH.
MY CONTACTS REPORT THAT
MANAFORT HAS BEEN HEAVILY
PRERKD ON THE WIKILEAKS
ISSUE.
THERE ARGUMENT IS THAT THEIR
CLIENT HAS NOT LIED AND THAT
THE SPECIAL COUNSEL IS
SEEKING INFORMATION EITHER
THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE OR
THEY DO NOT BELIEVE EXISTS.
SO, THE PUBLIC HEARING
SHORTLY I THINK LATER THIS
MONTH OR IN JANUARY WILL
ALLOW BOTH SIDES TO MAKE THE
ARGUMENT AS TO WHETHER
MANAFORT HAS BROKEN THE
AGREEMENT OR WHETHER THE
SPECIAL COUNSEL AS OTHER
WITNESSES HAVE ALLEGED HAVE
BEEN USING STRONG ARM
TACTICS TO OBTAIN
INFORMATION THAT THEY DON’T
HAVE OR THEY SAY IS FALSE
INFORMATION THEY SIMPLY WILL
NOT --
>> LOOKING AT THE DOCUMENTS,
JONATHAN TURLEY, THERE IS
WITH THIS ONE SECTION ON
PAIGE 9 WHEN IT COMES TO
MANAFORT THAT THEY SUGGEST
THAT HE HAS LIED ABOUT HIS
CONTACTS WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION.
CATHERINE REFERENCED IT
THERE SO THE EVIDENCE
DEMONSTRATES THAT MANAFORT
HAD CONTACT WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION TEXT EXCHANGE
IN MAY.
SECRETARY ACCORDING TO
ANOTHER MANAFORT COLLEAGUE.
MANAFORT SAID IN
FEBRUARY 2018 THAT MANAFORT
HAD BEEN IN COMMUNICATION
WITH SENIOR ADMINISTRATION
OFFICIAL.
FEBRUARY 2018 UP THROUGH
FEBRUARY 2018 A REVIEW OF
DOCUMENTS RECOVERED FROM A
SEARCH OF MANAFORT’S
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS
ADDITIONAL CONTACTS WITH
ELECTION OFFICIALS.
THEY SAY THEY HAVE THE JUICE
TO --
>> YEAH, MUCH OF THE
MANAFORT MATERIAL SHOULD NOT
REALLY PRESENT A THREAT TO
THE WHITE HOUSE MANAFORT WAS
COMMITTING CRIMES ALL OVER
THE GLOBE.
AND A LOT OF THIS GOES TO
THOSE TRANSACTIONS, THOSE
DEALINGS TOTALLY UNRELATED
TO THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN AND
THE WHITE HOUSE.
IT’S THAT SECTION THAT YOU
JUST REFERENCED WHICH IS A
SERIOUS PROBLEM.
WOULD ALREADY KNOW THERE IS
A DEFENSE AGREEMENT THAT
EXISTED AND CONTINUED TO BE
USED BETWEEN MANAFORT AND
THE WHITE HOUSE AFTER HIS
PLEA THAT’S EXCEPTIONALLY
RARE.
>> Bret: CORSI HAD ONE TOO.
>> MANAFORT COOPERATING
WITNESS MEETING WITH
PROSECUTORS AND ACCORDING TO
REPORTS, HIS COUNSEL WAS
RELAYING WHAT THE
PROSECUTORS WERE ASKING HIM
ABOUT THIS GOES ONE STEP
FURTHER AND THIS IS
SUGGESTING DIRECT CONTACTS
APPROVED BY MANAFORT TO
SPEAK WITH MEMBERS OF THE
ADMINISTRATION.
THIS IS WHERE IT GETS SPORTY
IF YOU DIG DEEPER.
THAT IS MUELLER COULD BE
TRYING TO DEVELOP A SERIOUS
OBSTRUCTION.
COOPERATING WITH SPECIAL
COUNSEL.
IF THERE WAS ANY AGREEMENT
GOING BACK AND FORTH ABOUT
HIS CURTAILING INFORMATION,
WITHHOLDING INFORMATION,
THAT WOULD BE ON ALL FOURS
AN OBSTRUCTION CASE THAT
WOULD BE, NO ONE WOULD DOUBT
THAT AS A DEFINITION.
HERE’S THE PROBLEM.
THERE’S A CRIME FRAUD
EXCEPTION TO PRIVILEGE
ARGUMENTS.
IF MUELLER ARGUES THAT WHAT
THEY WERE DOING WAS USING
THAT DEFENSE AGREEMENT
UNDERMINE THE INVESTIGATION,