Hey there, it's new orbital, editor in chief of the virgin host of the virtuous and decoder the verge turning timid and resolve. Live in York, city on city, twenty seven and twenty third with an epic today of it, of course, I'll, be there with other notable journalist virgin some incredible guess. Immersive tech in our experiences, although DJ, is in great need of food and drink, for a limited time or offering vocs media podcast network fans one and fifty dollars off our standard tick go to the virtual com, such on the virtual tickets and enter promo code dollar? Sign nine nine, now checker I'd love to see you CAFE and W N Y see studios welcome to stay tuned. I'm preparing your office, dealing with people who have extraordinary amount of influence and power, and they wanna put there I'm on the scales of justice and committed people not to cooperate or not to come forward or not to be forthright or not supply evidence, and that is extremely problematic. That's animals

she's the former attorney general of the state of New Jersey and the first repeat guests here on station this weekend- and I answered some of your questions about the Mueller Investigation- a lot of happened a lot happened, and I thought it would be great to bring her back this week because she's been a state prosecutor, a federal prosecutor as smart as anyone. I know on these issues as stoffels anyone I know and throw going to run through some of the things that people have been talking about with respect to the Russia investigation. Hopefully we can clear some of it up for you before we get to that conversation. Usually the beginning of the show I take twitter and from the phone line during this conversation within. We will be taking a lot of questions along the way, but I thought it address a couple, a quick things up top, so a lot of things happened is weak. Let's run through a few those those quickly first sheriff pile who was pardoned by present Donald Trump analyses running for the

that's bad represented there. Eliza was congressmen from Southern California announced that he's retiring, that's good Representative Dinnerware Backer also a congressmen from southern California. If you'll do announced that he was retiring, that would be even better centre calmly Harris and Senator Corey Booker were named to the Senate Judiciary Committee. They will become only the set and third african american senators ever to serve on that important committee. Where I was humble staffer for four and a half years, that's good Steve Bannon, it was announced, was being thrown at a bright bark. Who cares Obviously many other things also happened this week, for example, the debate about Doc,

and we're that's going on with the president's plans really are, but we can cover all of it. We wanted to devote this particular episode largely to the mother investigation. So before I get to that, I just want to make one correction to the episode we had last week were interviewed in your time. Reporter Maggie Haven in conversation with Maggie Harriman, I suggested that most news outlets, There were allegations of sexual misconduct by people who worked at those news. Outlets were discovered and investigating, reported on first by other news outlets and what that might suggest about the ability of media organisations to police themselves and our incorrectly said that the one place where the revelations came from the outlet itself was w and Y see. Actually, it was New York magazine. They did the first report,

allegations of impropriety on the part of people a w. Unless you want to correct the record. My guess this week is an Milgram coming up. We're gonna tackle your questions about the more investigation. I ask you two questions and she asked me a question or two stay to starting therapy can be daunted, especially if you're worried about the stigma. Seated with it, it's Catherine she would have really. You decided you want someone to assist you with your mental health, but Europe

where to enjoy a long and pretty vulnerable process. That's where talk space comes in to help you take charge of your mental health. Talk space lets you chat with a licensed therapist from the comfort of your home and I'm driving your car or anywhere. You feel comfortable. Unlike traditional therapy, talk space always adjust to your schedule. You can securely message your therapist anytime you're, taking the time to invest in your mental health, the road to get there shouldn't be a deterrent to joint talks based today can start moving forward with a single message. Just visit talks based our camp. One hundred dollars off your first month when you use promo code, preach at sign up. That's one hundred dollars offer talks based on Tom Promo code. T are eating. No one likes to think they're home isn't safe. I mean it's a home, it's where you should feel safest and when your away for, if you, The last thing on your mind, should be your stuff back home. Simply safe makes

easy to maintain your peace of mind, whether you're inside with your family or on get away and now simply save just launched their new wireless outdoor security camera? So you can check in whenever, wherever inside, outside with an ultra wide one hundred forty degrees field of view. You can see you tire yard, not just around I'm slice of it with a view from your front door, ten aid p hd resolution, even on it time zoom means the image is Crystal clear, no grainy nonsense, even at night, but simply it doesnt just give you a visual into your home. It has sound to their camera. Audio. You can speak to her and scare off, unwelcome visitors plus, because it's why less and runs offer rechargeable battery. You don't have to worry, that finding an outdoor outlet, you're sick, can be set up in minutes already have a simply safe set up that works for you, the new camera integrates with your simply safe home security system, extending it comprehensive protection to the outside, simply

If a celebrating this new camera by offering twenty percent your entire new system and your first month of monitoring service free when you unrolling interactive monitoring tool, your whole home security to a new level to learn more the exciting you simply safe wireless outdoor security, camera visit. Simply they d come slashed, stay tuned that simply saved our com, slash stay tuned. Amalgam will come back to the show I thinks are haven't make your first repeat: cast stolen paid, yes very much so so we thought, since we I think such a good time talking about the ups and downs of the mother investigation. The rush investigation of some people call it a few months ago

as we begin a new year, you have, there are few people who have been charged, those those things have to proceed through the system and to take stock and an make, as we always do, educated guess, about what the tea leaves me in what they say. Yes How far along this equation anything else. When is it going to happen? We have is going to be done yet the president's lawyers say it regularly it's done levied on tomorrow, and that never proves to be true. What's your sense The presidents lawyers have been saying it would be done at the end of twenty seventeen, since essentially the day that it said it began its obviously two thousand and eighteen, and it's not done so. We know that that's not accurate. What I think is a little bit tough on this one is that I think you and I would both assume

being far prosecutors. Having led big, complex cases that usually the last thing you do, as you interview the person at the top right, you're, always working your way up, and so the recent reports that the president is likely to be interviewed by Robert Mauler. His team soon could lead us to think that hey, they really are nearing the end. What sort of cautions me a little bit against that as I think that there are still pieces out there and other parts potentially of them, allegations that we have an answer. questions do we have an answer? The question to eat a who is Papadopoulos, cooperating against whose Flynn cooperating against you know? Does it just go to the Trump obstruction or what about the cushion or peace? I mean you and I haven't, had a chance to talk about this but cushion or as interviewed right before Flint, please guilty in his play, as announced in its solely in ninety minute. Interview based on those conversations with Flint has nothing to do with anything else, and so what is that and so to me there are. There are certain small indicators that there's a lot we still

No, that mother knows that we don't, and so what would normally think is that they're gonna interview trump. That means that this is coming to an end. I'm not so sure that that's right. So what sort by that little bit and what the fact of his reporting about a potential Trump interview means for where the only investigate I agree with you, when we had in a significant its and it was an overt investigation meeting. We had engaged the lawyers and everyone knew about it when it was high profile people that usually marked the end. However, we know say the first time there is a conversation about the potential high profile target being interviewed, doesn't have to happen. You know wait before going is overcome. That can happen someone's before it. I dont know if you know how much too leave. That- and I dont know how far in advance our conversation wouldn't happen. While people been asking, the question does Trump talk? What do you think? So? I think that's a very clear

So, first of all, you- and I probably should just say that, of course, every one in the country has a fifth amendment right to not self incriminate themselves. So anyone, including trump, can say, look I'm not talking, because if I talk you'd have that would get me in trouble, I would be sort of admitting to a crime, and so I'm not gonna. Do it so you member, but every reboot, the Michael, but yet I have not read the firebug. I've read some of the acts, but one are one thing, and that was described was it. Somebody was breathing the president on the constitution. They got bored by the fourth Something's wrong. I don't know about some bearing on whether he understands right against self information using seem to indicate that he has any knowledge that ray. I gotta make it through the first ten amendment comes right, so you say so you know that's the general right every American has. Everyone in our country has a fifth amendment, so in the category of voluntary interview, which often is a courtesy that afforded to people and certainly like the president, before you have to go the route of grand jury subpoena

and compelled testimony in front of twenty three Americans at which you can always do later? and I'm sure that's how mauler would do out is the first four I would be to say: hey. Would you come in and right and then the second would be. You know, we'd be habit issue, a subpoena need to what did you say you want to come in and talk to us and the President says this: was lawyers no go away? I'm busy, then the queen is: do you try to compel the testimony or not, and often we would yes do you think that they would in this case idea ideal I mean, I think, what seeing publicly reported and again you know we're speculating in Sweden. the inside of this, and so there is very possible their pieces. We don't know, but it's really clear from what's been publicly reported, that trumps lairs are trying to control or set parameters around? What that would look like, and so on if there's anything unusual about someone whose potential subject a matter coming in having their wares come in and say: hey we'd like to just give you written answers rights rights on the first question is

under oath or not under oath. I think a lot of people don't naturally, don't understand why someone would not be put under oath and, as you point out, like the FBI under arrest. You called the eighteen, USC thousand, and one is a crime in actually happens to be the crime with which to people in the rush investigation. been charged, it doesn't come. Am I experienced it to have someone come in first for an interview with the prosecutors. In the end, the federal agents, and, as you said, you can always do the grand jury subpoena later the reason you I think you would do a grand jury subpoena up front and ends or eliminate tat interview. Is that you? It so important that someone be formerly under oath at that point in time, and I could see times when that would happen. I think the other reason why you might do that is if you think you are only get one bite of the above, and that is very possibly the case here that modern His team are aware that Trump Trump and his lawyers will push back very hard on having multiple sit down with the special.

council and so, if it's one bite of the apple, I think this is a strategic. Question all right. Do you do the grand you say you have everything you might potentially need under oath the grand jury is the one that deliberates on potential charges against anyone, and so let's say you didn't. grand jury. You have a federal agent in a prosecutor interviewing a witness at that point. The record of that that conversation can still be put into the grand jury through the testimony of the the age right through the federal budget. So it's not like the grand just got nothing. It's it's. It's a big deal elastic a call from a listener on this very issue. I treat this as MAX from elsewhere, california- and I'm wondering with the news coming out this week- that numerous team are seeking to interview trump. What is the main question? You would be trying to answer I'm sure Mueller has a lot more information than we know publicly.

Given what we know. What is the question you would be turned to answer MAX requesting from California one small point before I put animals That is its pronounced smaller by mother. I have a thing for limits: pronunciation of last names, given my last name and when you think is the big question here. So I think that's a great question. You know there are few ways to think about this, that the first is the core basis for the special council, which is this investigation into Russia and whether or not the Trump campaign colluded with them. Hence in and hacking the election and releasing these email. So that's one area potential questioning, I think the areas that are more likely to be the focus of the conversation will be related to the obstruction questions to the firing of Michael Flynn to the firing of Jim call me too, all the sort of pieces that we now know when around that you ve got more

and two weeks when Flint, as in the White House after the White House, has been told that fund is potentially compromised because he's been untruthful in his reports about his conversation with the right? ambassador, what happened during that time? You ve got a or of known comments by Trump around did here. Did he not have these conversations with Jim call me asking for loyalty. You know asking him to go to basically let fling go there. the conversations with the Russians in the in the White House about it. I had this russian problem, so you ve got a lot of pieces where, You're gonna want to fill in place all the things that unite us no sitting here, because we don't know what Flynn has said and we don't know what other folks I Papadopoulos and potential others have said close, look about them. the danger and risk then to trumpet the grand jury setting up her interview with agents to not being truthful. So what's a he's asked the question Did you ask Jim call me

loyalty and did you ask him coming to let go of the flood investigation and Trump says No, I never did that. I never said that if there On the other hand, on the other side of that Jim Commies potential testimony his contemporaries notes of that no other way to believe that com is telling the truth? It's kind of a he said he said: is that a viable case of making the false statement so I mean, I think I think the question when it comes down to this is always. Can you prove that this statement was and so we have combing making this contemporaneous rating We also have some evidence from conversations that have been reported with then chief of staff, previous about him, making notes about conversations when the present had called call me and asked him to say publicly that Trump wasn't subjected were arrested. and so the question ice.

Would have, as is their other evidence like that out. Their related to these conversations, because I think you and I both would feel in a thousand and one if it's a he said he said question we want a little bit more than just it's, not that, wouldn't find one of the individuals, particularly Jim, coming to be credible, mean he's made a contemporaneous statement. His publicly stated it, but it would be really important. I think when you think about the thousand one, you have to be absolutely sure that is correct and again the devil's little bit in the detail on the language, and so you know, as reported It is a statement and essentially asking the head of the FBI to not investigate someone and so the words, I think, they're specifically matter a lot, and you would also Poland all the folks call me spoke to bright immediately afterwards when he walked outrage. What did he tell people? Did he say? Hey the president just told me to drop the flint case. What is that look like, and so, if you could prove if you could get that kind of collaboration which is

prosecutors, always look for, which is some evidence that what someone like Jim Komio saying is true independent evidence, then you can bring, I think, the thousand in one, if, if Trump or to say whenever that conversation, I didn't even mention Flynn and those on the left. The lack of a recording of conversation between us, you know, o Lord, your hope there to help their tapes Yep comes in handy right, because the phraseology matters and the other thing about how those questions are answered is this hypothetical I posed. I was talking about Donald Trump. Making the flats a fact your flat than I hadn't gotten out yet right, which most lawyers will tell their clients. Maybe it's the best thing to do when the interview is fraught with peril. For you with respect to a false statement, charge then that's. Why should I both know when the most common phrases you here and people see this irrational testimony over time for that public, but also in private deposition,

in interviews is the three way It's the middle were being a contraction. I don't recall yes, giving farmers get it citing weasel words. We have to have the whole family that a million times in testimony from other from Chrome. sentence, but I've also her it many times for my own witnesses, particularly long no witnesses and so completely that that is a very real possibility. I think what else is a real possibility is the sort of admit what you can't I deny what you can admit, and so the yeah had a conversation with enough for them. could be someone I guide a conversation with comin in I said, Flynn was again but I never asked him to do anything related to an investigation and I dont know why he would have done

You know some admission of the other some conversation, but it wasn't a request to drop a case, and so I see that as possible as well. Let's take another call. This is Andrew from Conquer California just curious. I was reading the New York Times article, which should appear suddenly to turn in general. The definitions was trying to get dirt on Mr Commie. Obviously they undermine him. I'm just curious. That implies that the USA G was complicit in attempting to obstruct justice, seems like an odd combination, just Terry's worker. Would your impressions of battle might be thanks thanks Andrei, so when we end when we spend a few minutes talking about the role non renewal of the attorney general of the United States, whose refused the present upset that he refused

there's also in an article that was referred to in the call the suggestion that the Why does council Don began tried to get sessions not to refuse a little bit about purportedly? That sessions asked someone for dirt on Jim call me, but my initial quick reaction of yours is without means. I dont know why there would have been. Any assumption that there was dirt? What kind of dirt I can about why somebody in one branch of government, the executive branch, would go out of his way to ask you know a staffer in the ban in the Congress for dirt. I think I said, the question as to whether it was directed by sessions either yes are you are you underwhelmed by that report? Well, I think a lot of that. Their reporting is very interesting on the question of tromp lobbying to not have session, refuse himself right, as you know, and the location is that he wanted the protection of sessions there to do not allow these investigations to go forward. We know the devil.

The details on that too, but I think that is something that the special councils office will look at and want to understand and what was said and what the intent behind that was why he wanted sessions and place the about the staff. I think it feels a little strange to me. I mean it seems strange to me to have the attorney general of the United States. Have a member of his staff go out and look for dirt. On the sitting head of the FBI bad reversed reserve, and I said, if that's true, then then he should go. Its complete I greatly to cry and ass his unprofessional, but there's another aspect that there was a mention in the call again, if it's true It was to find your engine call me in that sessions again, according to the article said. I want a negative article or derogatory article on Jim call me every day, yes, which is, would be also standing if it were trail and- and I think the way that I've seen the United States Department, justice work and the wedding you probably have as well as

it's hard to imagine a senior aid to the United States attorney general freelancing, like the Irish, that being said, there is no evidence at this point that it was directed by sessions or by senior, processions team, but I would want to understand more about that. I certainly would would want to know more about it, but it does feel incredibly strange to me also and Jim call me is not the guy who you think of when you think about getting dirt on somebody. It's not you call me point of sessions is already were accusing than that on call me a meat. Is it to set it up, so Trump can fire him? Is it to set it up? So call me resigns it's a little bit unclear to me what the end There is, if it's true in it may be true. We just like. We don't have enough to know other. That's that's accurate, also. This isn't, overall, how your government works kind of issue there on the same team, the FBI director, the attorney general decoupling, there are in the same family, and yet the director works for the attorney general as independent two annexed

but technically right, but technically within the department, but like in any institution through fights their termites. I had we had on the tides, arguments, rivalries and there, a robust exchange of opinions, and some people don't agree, but you keep that within the department. In the end you go outside to try to someone is something you see in pilot. You don't seem that the party up and put it in the front page of the newspaper crucial. So, if, if session- did something like that given overcome at some kind of you know, maybe not everyone will agree with how dismissive we, the report because it just doesn't seem so logical incredible. What does it do to the obstruction analysis this the little bit tricky and a lot of times when you think about crime, you think about a single act right, so a shooting or stabbing aura theft of something and there's a single act where, if you can prove that it was this, and who committed that act. You have completed crime obstruction can be more complicated.

because it's often not one single thing? It may be multiple things, and so here, as we talk about it, we talk about, for example, statements by Trump to Jim call me. The firing of Jim call me conversations with call me about Flynn and then In the context of all of this, this conversation about, I dont want sessions to refuse himself and what? If You think sessions was doing if he did anything to stop the investigation from going forward, and so those are the The questions that I do think are relevant to Mars inquiry when it comes to the obstruction side of were people trying to stop the investigation on Russia. and the end associations with the term campaign where they try to stop that from going forward and where they doing it with the necessary corrupt. Tend to do that and where they trying to stop. You know either by getting people. why not tell the truth by

strong evidence, whatever whatever sort of examples of that or just to not prosecuted case, to basically sort of throw a case that presumes violated. There was a case to throw for the purposes of destruction their names, have been re, evaluate and that's important point to right. I mean at the time that people may be obstructing just as they may not know. Actually, whether or not the case can be charge and they can still be taking steps to prevent law enforcement, persecutors from understanding what happen, and so I think this sessions. Peace is a part of the puzzle on its own. I don't think that constitutes obstruction buddy. And I think obstruction can be a number of things and when it comes to proving intent There are a lot of conversations that you're gonna want access to to understand what was driving somebody to do the things that they did. You know you know, Amsterdam it having been law enforcement that if you lie,

or obstruct in some way and investigation, even if, ultimately, as you said, there was no case to be made in the underlying investigation, distiller crime, as so important crime Thank you and I both agree because it's like throwing sand in the eyes of the empire and if you don't make it a point to prosecute and hold accountable people who will just Willy nilly lied to investigators, you can uncover the truth, can help people accountable, set the terrible president. It's bad for deterrence, those other good law enforcement. I think injustice delivering reasons why you prosecutor person, also at mean it's. It's often occur not the crime, and so can I can't tell you how many juries I've had where what really gets them is the attempt to cover even if it's not reach the lie, it's not often. Sometimes the initial is not such you're not even charge, but it's the cover up that that really sort of gauze people's was a principle. We agree with that and in this, as you mentioned, you ve seen that unfold in that way in court, and it resonates with juries, because my question,

this is not a garden right, a case and much of it is in the court, a public opinion, maybe being Congress have resulted in any case, be brought, but what you think will be fast forward a little bit. What you think will be the reaction politically and in terms of acceptance of and what mother does and the credibility of the mother if, at the end of the day, it is clear, there was no underlying crime could be proved, but the president and or other people. acted because it in one investigation go forward, but that investigation is allowed to go. Unfettered would not have resulted in charge. hiding competent, reacted? Well, that's integrate But I do think travel react. Yes, I understand It will not immediately be claims that the investigations legitimate, because the underlying allegations were not proven and if you look

trumps Lawyers- they always talk about, there's no evidence of collusion. They never talk about whether there is evidence of obstruction really mean it. The conversations often about this collusion question, and so maybe that is of a set up that if it comes down to it, there's only evidence of obstruction to basically say that that's not legitimate sitting. There are few points, one as you and I both know this is done we frequently in the american criminal justice system at the state, local at the federal level, and it is to ensure the integrity of investigations and its critical. important that we be able to understand whether not crimes were committed and that people be forthright in those countries actions whether its with an FBI, agent or sitting in a grand jury. I think that there are core values around that. What I think is more political side of this question of how people well we'll take it anymore she was in the Manhattan DA's office with Robert Morgenthau, and we saw no politics. I mean

He saw his job and I love him for this. To basically have the assistance do their jobs without fear or favour without any concern about politics. Now I dont know whether he was in calls from poet, politicians and you, and I can talk about just for a second having both done a lot of political corruption. Work when I was eighty in New Jersey, we did a lot of political corruption, work, we prosecuted, Democrats and Republicans. I similarly saw it as my job to protect the lawyers and the investigators on our team made it pretty large state. Why team from any politics- but I did field calls all the time from an elected office who didn't want us to do investigations Raymond solve it. Is you hang up on them? I did hang up on it. of his stunning and I think I think the importance of not having fear or favour or politics color, Criminal prosecution space is so critically important to me man, it's it's how I was right and how I was trained and so the absurd

can peace matter so much to me and it matters so much. I think, particularly in corruption cases where we have to make sure There is a way that we can under and what's happened, your often dealing with people who have extraordinary amount of influence and power and they wanna put there, I'm on the scales of justice and convince people not to cooperate or not to come forward or not to be forthright or not. Supply Evan, and that is extremely problematic, so here's another that that happens, sometimes investigations critically ones that are the big deal in the stakes are high and there's nothing, but I, takes it I've seen in recent memory than than this, once it evolves sitting the United States of America, so get push back only from the president's lawyers. But also from political allies and others, and so one of the areas of push back home. I talk about sent absurd. is this idea that the investigation is tainted and there is bias the prosecution. that includes FBI agents and most notably

revelation that there was an FBI agent who was assigned to the special councils office. who was sending texts to someone suggesting that he didn't like the president as it before the election. My understanding is that, as soon as that became known, to buy, Mahler Unite, probably are in guessing. That mother would have been very angry. Has that I put in Asia, Russia and their person was removed, but on the basis of the fact of this person, this one agent out of many was on the prosecution team that the investigation should shut down in its forever absolutely and permanently. painted. I have a view on that which will share in a minute. What's your view that it is the most high profile case that I can. think of in recent memory and obviously its most high profile case going right now and in my view it has become very politicized. I think, and we see this and both parties. But I think there is very strong effort right now to frame the conversation around Mauler and what he's doing, and so for someone like me who,

thinks of Mars. This unimpeachable person to see him these credible efforts to impeach him on a daily basis. This strikes me as well of those many things, and I want to agree with you that this to me shows incredibly poor judgment, the part of the FBI agent and is problematic and say without question mahler- did the right thing, the minute he found. About it, he D, you know he fired the agent, the lawyer, who was involved and relaxing tried to separate the investigation from it. I also agree with you that it would have caused him a distress to know that this was happening on his team. I do want to put this The context a little bit of the old law school adage that you know when you have the facts, pound facts when you have the La Palma LAW, when you don't have either pound the table and yell really loudly and there's an we don't and no sitting here whether mauler has the facts are that the law, What we do know is that the other side, the people who are trump supporters, are very much trying to discredit Mahler and his team, and so there's a lot of pounding of the table about everything that could potentially raise issues and so on.

and trying to rephrase this conversation not about the criminal prosecution, the criminal process, but about is Bob Mueller by asked is his team, biased? And so I think a lot of this has to be seen through that lend right. It was actually pound the table on the legal point, then, I don't know, is fully appreciated by people who are thinking about this we're talking about this in the public, and that is what the consequences for a case like this case, where neither is when you have an agent who looks like he may have been biased in some way or behaved inappropriately or across some line? Because you know these: did the duration, of life and humanity is people's eyes, make mistakes, and sometimes people do bad things, and sometimes a cop commit a crime or an an agent has to closer relationship with a witness or has a beef with the victim or some other thing that now he doesn't look good but requires them to be moved from a case we want. I met from it

is saying. First of all, there is no excuse for what this agent did. It was terrible. Judgment should have been removed. That was the right thing and what's that the for the whole thing in the analogy. You know we're talking about this recently, you imagine as a person who goes into a house and he kills an entire family for prison, family and there's all sorts of that is. Dna Evans is ballistic evidence witnesses and it turns out. It sometimes happens that one of the six ginger copses investigating that murder did something back. we had a bias and needs to be removed from the. So my comparing these things, but just to use a hypothetical for the sake of discussion. It doesn't mean that there was a murder and it doesn't mean that that's attacks made. The murder gets a get out of jail free card and can go home to kill other people. Times. Investigations can become too and we hate it when it happen

and disciplinary action can be taken, people can be fired, removed disbarred if it's an attorney for all sorts of sanctions to be imposed on the on the bad acting party, but It still gonna be true that you have to prove beyond reasonable doubt your fact, based on crop sure and other witnesses, and once this this tainted agent is taken off, that doesn't mean and courts will not hold that the whole case has to be tanked, that's right, and if we think about this ticket ticket, even one step further. The grand jury still is called upon to decide whether Not a crime was committed, it's more likely than not that a crime was committed by this specific person and some of the complication, I think, with the investigations. So much of it has to be behind closed doors. Grand juries are secret. There's a lot of reasons. Why I know a lot of the pieces that are happening, but the moment cases indicted it becomes a very public and very transparent process.

ass through which the government is required to prove beyond reasonable doubt that someone is guilty, and so certainly the defence lawyers could raise two. Just by us or allegations that in the indictment, should be thrown out because it was politically motivated. All that would be heard by a judge. The government will have the opportunity to respond and the case goes forward and again the end of the day, the question is whether a crime was committed and that can be proven beyond reasonable doubt, and so this is an example of bad judgment. I agree with you. We know people are people and we often see mistakes problems and that's normal in the criminal justice system, but the cases the way that they move forward all of these, things will be tested and the defence wars will have the opportunity to challenge all of it in a court of law in front of public and so they'll be a real opportunity to that. These questions and again

the day it will be up to a jury to decide our people guilty of the crimes of it. When we take another call, a practice is the record from shorter Bill Alabama. My question is with Trump him: he hardly himself, and do you feel that Europe is going to give the cases to the states to go ahead and prosecute once and it from does harden? Are all these people? Thank you, Sir, have occurred again with Mueller is not the name of the spaghetti or something I don't know about that, but we have to be nice to people from Alabama this week. There must attribute great questions we spent all our time talking about what happens. The investigation You know what evidence or might be what charges could be brought. What referrals can be made for impeachment if, if any but coarser possibilities of all this being Schwarzer

and what did you two categories of them, as I think about it? One is on a par and the other is the shutdown of special causeless. This person was asking about patents. A prediction and be a thought on the propriety of such pardons and I'm gonna stay, from predictions very smart and herself. I think a ton of things and twenty seventeen none of us would have guessed in and I'm sure that's will be true of twenty eight into it. So I think the pardon questions is really important one. In there is an office of legal counsel, which is an office in the department justice there's an opinion that was written during the night an error, essentially saying that the president cannot pardon himself. Essentially the same person can't be judge and jury in the same case and that's a long held established principle in american jurisprudence exists, plasma, reserve and explain the folks at least

difficult to the office of the council. What that means. So the office of legal counsel, the they really are, the ones who interpret the law for the United States Department of Justice and for the president when it comes to questions like this, it is unbelievably important office generally has the last word, and so, when you look at who argues cases before the Supreme Court comes out of the office of the council at this General office works closely with them, but oh well see they're, really in charge of driving the policy and what the interpretation of the law is, and so that put the big deal. It's a big deal. That's a better way said the idea. That's a little! Less cut the other tat, those without look because people, if the president waits for people gonna died in their pardons them, is that in any way, possible to be brought into an obstruction case, so seemed it seems very odd Emmy. I think the short answer is probably now to the second part of question gets to appoint. A lot of people have made

We're spending a minute or two on it, and that is the president. Can pardon other people in connection with a federal charge However, we have a federal system here, so their federal prosecutors and federal laws are also local and state laws, and so, if any member Adele trumps Administration associates or family members is charged by Secretary general or district attorney. The constitution is not to that. That has to be done by the governor of the state. If at all- and so the theory has been circulating- mother has made an arrangement with the New York attorney general originated, with whom I worked when I was use attorney to ensure the inability of the president to derail accountability because there will also be these state charges and that's a beautiful and intelligent and crafty marriage that has taken place, and I would ask you

in a moment, anchors you're, the attorney general, but my quick response to that is: I'm not sure that that's true generally speaking out of no offense to anyone, but anywhere federal prosecutor and also state prosecutor, generally speaking, the feds when their investigating something didn't have much interest in sharing things with the locals? Yet because I thought you know we got this on occasion, you felt the need to work, with your counterparts in the days office or the situation was office, because those people who are independently elected and of independent mandate themselves. Looking at some of the stuff that you're looking at and you dont worry them to get in your way and, to a lesser extent, vice versa, and so you do at adults do and you can elaborate with and coordinate with the local prosecutor, so you're not screwing up each other's cases, if a and sometimes even their different laws, and so the fairy the federal government may well have one set of laws. The state has a different and there can be all kinds of

and why cases would go state or federal if both sides are looking at them, and so I had regular meetings with the head of the FBI with the US attorneys when I was a g and for certain this is Bob Mueller's case. This is the special council Yes, I see no version events in which he has come to any agreement with. state Agee others, including urgent, including originator men at the end of the case, if there was, and, at the special councils office, had reason to believe that a state crime was committed that could be proven. They could make a reform there's a new could have thereby ensuring yes, yes- and we are we made- we made referrals like that too. Yes, and that is a totally legitimate thing to do, but in the middle of an investigation I find that to be completely not believable. If you, in our thing about how this plays out, I think you know there's a lot of sort of strategic thinking and

theories about how it can go and we just we talked about a couple of some of which I think are, are potentially viable and of which eight I dont. But let's say hypothetically, we get to the end of the investigation and Mahler has found evidence of obstruction of just on the part of on the part of the present potentially other charged, but this is. This is a deep hypothetical, but let's say we get to that point: does he charge him criminally? Does he refer him to the House You know, I had sort of view- and I have talked about this before- and I sort of thought what has to be a referral to the house, but I've since read more about it and in of the plain language, constitution does not make the president of the United States immune from prosecution, nausea opinion too, there's an hour opinion on it? That was done by Bill Cottons Department of justice? It says you can't do it that says that says a sitting president cannot be an dynamically by the feds guess, dialogue

Lucy? I dont have dined data governor not and there's never been an example of having been done. It look, I don't know, but it seems to me off the top of my head that. if you are in a position to decide something there as weighty as bringing a federal, criminal charge against a sitting president of the United States that you want the authority to be able to do that to be crystal clear, and even if there is a good hour, I think, and even a good argument, and I think that about monetarist here- and I think, even if there, even if there is an argument that by smart, people and you will Elsie opinion that says well basin on the constitution, spectrum, language, the constitution, etc. That organs, lawyers, concessional oars, make a city and it can be charged given what a big deal it is and given the need for there to be credibility on the decisions made by the special Councils Office, and given the faith that we want people to have in the process strikes me is

in a moment. I love this strikes. Me is not a good idea for the long term fade and confidence in the rule of LAW to hang your hat on that, I think, is not a great idea. And does not strike me as the kind of person by Malaria Niagara EGRET needs is a fascinating question, but at the end of the day, I think more will be like he always is, which straight down the middle of the road. You know you'll stay within the confines of what's establishing my comment that you know is- and this is not in the context of this particular case- because it you have some of the allegations- obstruction could be serious and conspiracy. to undermine the election, could be serious. But I can imagine different circumstances. I'm not not talking about this. You, you could imagine a circumstance in which a special council uncovers. Deeply deeply deeply, even worse crimes, no conspiracy to murder, You know give aid to the enemy, all sorts of, even things that end

One would agree, there's over overwhelming evidence of that you should bring it coming. Charge and bring the criminal got our rights NGO, the court's, because it so dire in these judgments the prosecutors have to make and a little less clarity in the law can sometimes be counterbalance by overwhelm clarity of bad conduct and harm. That's my fun. Let's take article I put my name is noble, lodgers cars from closer calmer, I just wanna know: are you a stable genius

my son, I believe the come out I blow. The quote from the president was very stable genius. I am not brain or someone who is a name is- and I was gonna say I think you are neither stable origins and has been like three hours talking about this and I pray you coming in, I was going to say to people. I had ten more items on my list to do. What's going to become of Michael Flynn, how long is going to take for the trial against Manafort to take place other further she's to drop with respect to some people. We ve been talking about Carter, page and others. We can get all of it because it's complicated and it hard to sort of do an explanation of things have a lot of like you know, you sometimes see on tv where people have three or four minutes to talk about. So we took a deep if on a few issues- and hopefully will see you back here and talk about this more in the future. To have me,

so this report, to show where I'd like to talk about something that struck me personally this week, and so let me tell you a story about what I was doing this past Saturday. So this past Saturday, I spent the entire day at chairman on high school in menial that long island, I was not there for remedial math class I was there attending a speech tournament run by the forensic League where high school students from the New York area competing in speaking competition. I wasn't it for random randomly there, where my son's competes in speech, dormant, here's, a guy's got shot out, but somewhere else, and I'm a volunteer parent who, in a sort of goes to these tournaments from time to time and judges. The kids on their speaking ability, which I think is the funding it Went away to spend time with my son also the particular category, my sundays, and in two rounds of which I judged is called extemporaneous speaking

for those of you don't know that category is, let me describe it for a moment. A student is given a choice of topics from international relations or foreign policy or domestic policy or economics, and is given thirty minutes to research. The topic come up with a point of view on the question being asked: formulate a persuasive speech in support of his or her argument stand up before an adult judge and give a polished, seven minute, multi part speech without any notes at all.

I'll tell you when I was in high school. I do public speaking in competition. I one time did the category of extemporaneous speaking and I have never been more terrified of my life. I think I almost threw up like three times. Never again so to give you a sense of how difficult this was actually took. Some of the topics home with me here, the kinds of questions that these students, sixteen seventeen years of age, were asked to answer on a Saturday. For example: how should the international community respond to China's disregard of recent sanctions against them? korea- that's not so easy. Here's another one, young man, came into the room and handed me his question, which was this is the De Arcy headed towards another civil war, I'm taking the Dominican republic? What's the oh, it's a demo

adequate public of Congo and this young man gave a polished, intelligent, smart, seven minute presentation on the subject without notes. It was a little awkward when another student walked into the classroom. To give a speech on the topic she had been assigned, which was The recent revelations regarding russian involvement in the U S, twenty sixteen election be explored. I kind of had a view on that, but I try to keep my view to myself. The boy story, is not to tell you about my salary or to bring a little bit about my son, who has the courage that his father didn't to enter this very difficult academic exercise, but it's a tell you that I was so impressed that they are all these people,

not even a voting age. Yet who are the future leaders of the country who are so smart, we're so prepared who are so thoughtful who spend their time not only going to class in doing other things, you need to do to become a successful student, but also know so much more than I know. that international relations and economics and everything else that it was literally the most hopeful moment. I've had about the country and we're we're going because if we have young people like Then we have little less to worry about than I thought. Well, that's it for this episode of statehood. Thanks again to my guest and milk,

If you like, the show rate and review and an apple pie casts, it really does help new listeners discover the show some your questions about news and politics, tweet them to me a prepared or even better, give me a call at six nine to four seven, seven, three, three: eight, that six, six nine too for greek statin, is presented by CAFE and W and why she studious is produced by the team. Tine apples, free media, crisper, Reuben, Henry Malawi, generalised Berman, Joel Level and MAX Linsky, our music is by Andrew does especial thanks to Julia Doyle, Jeff, eyes him and Jake Maccabees. I'm prepared statement.