YOU. THAT IS "ALL IN" FOR THIS THAT IS "ALL IN" FOR THIS EVENING. EVENING. "THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW" STARTS "THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW" STARTS RIGHT NOW. RIGHT NOW. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. >> THANKS, MY FRIEND. >> THANKS, MY FRIEND. AND THANKS FOR JOINING US THIS AND THANKS FOR JOINING US THIS HOUR. HOUR. IN THE SUMMER OF 1974, THE IN THE SUMMER OF 1974, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL WHO WAS SPECIAL COUNSEL WHO WAS INVESTIGATING THE WATERGATE INVESTIGATING THE WATERGATE SCANDAL WROTE A LETTER TO SCANDAL WROTE A LETTER TO CONGRESS, TO THE JUDICIARY CONGRESS, TO THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE IN CONGRESS DETAILING COMMITTEE IN CONGRESS DETAILING WHAT HIS INVESTIGATION, WHAT HIS WHAT HIS INVESTIGATION, WHAT HIS PROSECUTORS AND INVESTIGATORS PROSECUTORS AND INVESTIGATORS HAD TURNED UP ABOUT CRIMINAL HAD TURNED UP ABOUT CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR BY THE PRESIDENT AT THE BEHAVIOR BY THE PRESIDENT AT THE TIME, PRESIDENT RICHARD NIXON. TIME, PRESIDENT RICHARD NIXON. NOW, BY THIS POINT, BY THE NOW, BY THIS POINT, BY THE SUMMER OF 1974, THE PRESIDENT’S SUMMER OF 1974, THE PRESIDENT’S CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN, THAT WOULD CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN, THAT WOULD ALSO HAVE BEEN HIS ATTORNEY ALSO HAVE BEEN HIS ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE PRESIDENT’S WHITE GENERAL, THE PRESIDENT’S WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF, A WHOLE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF, A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER SENIOR WHITE BUNCH OF OTHER SENIOR WHITE HOUSE PERSONNEL FROM THE NIXON HOUSE PERSONNEL FROM THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION, HAD ALREADY BEEN ADMINISTRATION, HAD ALREADY BEEN INDICTED A FEW MONTHS EARLIER INDICTED A FEW MONTHS EARLIER FOR SERIOUS CRIMES. FOR SERIOUS CRIMES. AND IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT AND IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT INDICTMENT, THE GRAND JURY HAD INDICTMENT, THE GRAND JURY HAD NAMED PRESIDENT NIXON AS A NAMED PRESIDENT NIXON AS A CO-CONSPIRATOR. CO-CONSPIRATOR. EVEN THOUGH HE PERSONALLY WAS EVEN THOUGH HE PERSONALLY WAS NOT INCLUDED AS A DEFENDANT IN NOT INCLUDED AS A DEFENDANT IN THE INDICTMENT. THE INDICTMENT. HE WAS THE UNINDICTED HE WAS THE UNINDICTED CO-CONSPIRATOR. CO-CONSPIRATOR. NOW, THE LEGAL TEAM WORKING FOR NOW, THE LEGAL TEAM WORKING FOR PRESIDENT NIXON AT THE TIME PRESIDENT NIXON AT THE TIME RAISED A CHALLENGE TO THAT. RAISED A CHALLENGE TO THAT. THEY BASICALLY CHALLENGED THEY BASICALLY CHALLENGED WHETHER THE INFORMATION IN THE WHETHER THE INFORMATION IN THE CASE, THE EVIDENCE SEEN BY THE CASE, THE EVIDENCE SEEN BY THE GRAND JURY THAT PRODUCED THAT GRAND JURY THAT PRODUCED THAT INDICTMENT, PRODUCED THOSE INDICTMENT, PRODUCED THOSE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE PRESIDENT, THE PRESIDENT’S LEGAL PRESIDENT, THE PRESIDENT’S LEGAL TEAM QUESTIONED WHETHER THAT TEAM QUESTIONED WHETHER THAT EVIDENCE WAS ACTUALLY SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE WAS ACTUALLY SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT SOMETHING AS RADICAL TO WARRANT SOMETHING AS RADICAL AS NAMING THE SERVING PRESIDENT AS NAMING THE SERVING PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AS PART OF OF THE UNITED STATES AS PART OF A SERIOUS CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY. A SERIOUS CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY. AND SO WHEN THE PRESIDENT’S AND SO WHEN THE PRESIDENT’S LEGAL TEAM RAISED THAT LEGAL TEAM RAISED THAT OBJECTION, THIS KIND OF OBJECTION, THIS KIND OF MOMENTOUS THING HAPPENED, AT THE MOMENTOUS THING HAPPENED, AT THE HEIGHT OF THE SUMMER IN 1974. HEIGHT OF THE SUMMER IN 1974. BECAUSE THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE BECAUSE THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE IN CONGRESS, CHAIRMAN OF THE IN CONGRESS, CHAIRMAN OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, WROTE TO JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, WROTE TO THE WATERGATE SPECIAL COUNSEL, THE WATERGATE SPECIAL COUNSEL, THE PROSECUTOR WHO HAD BROUGHT THE PROSECUTOR WHO HAD BROUGHT THAT INDICTMENT, AND SAID THAT INDICTMENT, AND SAID BASICALLY HEY, YOU OBTAINED THIS BASICALLY HEY, YOU OBTAINED THIS INDICTMENT, YOU PRESENTED INDICTMENT, YOU PRESENTED EVIDENCE TO THE GRAND JURY EVIDENCE TO THE GRAND JURY SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT THIS SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT THIS INDICTMENT. INDICTMENT. IF, IN FACT, THAT EVIDENCE WAS IF, IN FACT, THAT EVIDENCE WAS ALSO SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT ALSO SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT NAMING THE PRESIDENT AS A NAMING THE PRESIDENT AS A CO-CONSPIRATOR IN THESE CRIMES, CO-CONSPIRATOR IN THESE CRIMES, WELL, LET’S HEAR IT. WELL, LET’S HEAR IT. WHAT IS THAT EVIDENCE? WHAT IS THAT EVIDENCE? WHAT IS IT THAT YOU FOUND ABOUT WHAT IS IT THAT YOU FOUND ABOUT PRESIDENT RICHARD NIXON THAT PRESIDENT RICHARD NIXON THAT JUSTIFIED THIS ALLEGATION THAT JUSTIFIED THIS ALLEGATION THAT HE WAS IN ON ALL OF THESE HE WAS IN ON ALL OF THESE CRIMES, TOO? CRIMES, TOO? AND THE SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR AND THE SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR WATERGATE RESPONDED, BASICALLY WATERGATE RESPONDED, BASICALLY SAID OKAY, HERE YOU GO, DEAR MR. SAID OKAY, HERE YOU GO, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN, HAPPY TO. CHAIRMAN, HAPPY TO. YOU SEND US A SUBPOENA, WE’LL YOU SEND US A SUBPOENA, WE’LL HAPPILY SEND YOU OVER OUR HAPPILY SEND YOU OVER OUR SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE PERTAINING SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE PERTAINING TO PRESIDENT NIXON’S CONDUCT IN TO PRESIDENT NIXON’S CONDUCT IN THE WATERGATE MANNER. THE WATERGATE MANNER. AND THE PROSECUTOR THEN PRODUCED AND THE PROSECUTOR THEN PRODUCED PAGE AFTER PAGE AFTER PAGE AFTER PAGE AFTER PAGE AFTER PAGE AFTER PAGE OF DETAILED ALLEGATIONS PAGE OF DETAILED ALLEGATIONS THAT NIXON HAD, IN FACT, THAT NIXON HAD, IN FACT, COMMITTED TONS OF CRIMES, COMMITTED TONS OF CRIMES, INCLUDING LOTS OF CRIMINAL INCLUDING LOTS OF CRIMINAL OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. "BEGINNING NO LATER THAN MARCH "BEGINNING NO LATER THAN MARCH 21st, 1973, THE PRESIDENT JOINED 21st, 1973, THE PRESIDENT JOINED AN ONGOING CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY AN ONGOING CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY TO OBSTRUCT A CRIMINAL TO OBSTRUCT A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AND TO COMMIT INVESTIGATION AND TO COMMIT PERJURY, INCLUDING MAKING AND PERJURY, INCLUDING MAKING AND CAUSING TO BE MADE FALSE CAUSING TO BE MADE FALSE STATEMENTS AND DECLARATIONS, STATEMENTS AND DECLARATIONS, MAKING OFFERS OF CLEMENCY AND MAKING OFFERS OF CLEMENCY AND LENIENCY, AND OBTAINING LENIENCY, AND OBTAINING INFORMATION FROM THE JUSTICE INFORMATION FROM THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO THWART ITS DEPARTMENT TO THWART ITS INVESTIGATION. INVESTIGATION. THERE’S EVIDENCE THAT THE THERE’S EVIDENCE THAT THE PRESIDENT CONSPIRED WITH OTHERS PRESIDENT CONSPIRED WITH OTHERS TO DEFRAUD THE UNITED STATES, TO DEFRAUD THE UNITED STATES, AND TO COMMIT VIOLATIONS OF AND TO COMMIT VIOLATIONS OF CERTAIN FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAWS, CERTAIN FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAWS, TO WIT, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, TO WIT, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, INCLUDING PAYING OF FUNDS AND INCLUDING PAYING OF FUNDS AND OFFS OF CLEMENCY AND OTHER OFFS OF CLEMENCY AND OTHER BENEFITS TO INFLUENCE THE BENEFITS TO INFLUENCE THE TESTIMONY OF WITNESSES. TESTIMONY OF WITNESSES. MAKING AND FACILITATING, THE MAKING AND FACILITATING, THE MAKING OF FALSE STATEMENTS AND MAKING OF FALSE STATEMENTS AND DECLARATIONS, OBTAINING DECLARATIONS, OBTAINING INFORMATION ABOUT THE ONGOING INFORMATION ABOUT THE ONGOING INFORMATION FROM THE JUSTICE INFORMATION FROM THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEPARTMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF DIVERTING OR THWARTING THE DIVERTING OR THWARTING THE INVESTIGATION. INVESTIGATION. ALSO PERJURY, INCLUDING THE ALSO PERJURY, INCLUDING THE PRESIDENT’S DIRECT AND PERSONAL PRESIDENT’S DIRECT AND PERSONAL EFFORTS TO ENCOURAGE AND EFFORTS TO ENCOURAGE AND FACILITATE THE GIVING OF FACILITATE THE GIVING OF MISLEADING AND FALSE TESTIMONY MISLEADING AND FALSE TESTIMONY BY AIDES. BY AIDES. ALSO, BRIBERY BY DIRECTLY AND ALSO, BRIBERY BY DIRECTLY AND INDIRECTLY OFFERING SOMETHING OF INDIRECTLY OFFERING SOMETHING OF VALUE, INCLUDING CLEMENCY AND/OR VALUE, INCLUDING CLEMENCY AND/OR A PARDON, WITH THE INTENT TO A PARDON, WITH THE INTENT TO INFLUENCE TESTIMONY BEFORE GRAND INFLUENCE TESTIMONY BEFORE GRAND JURIES, COURTS, AND JURIES, COURTS, AND CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES. CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES. ALSO OBSTRUCTION OF A CRIMINAL ALSO OBSTRUCTION OF A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION. INVESTIGATION. INVESTIGATION." INVESTIGATION." IT GOES ON AND ON. IT GOES ON AND ON. THAT’S EVIDENCE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT’S EVIDENCE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT PRESIDENT NIXON TOOK DIRECT THAT PRESIDENT NIXON TOOK DIRECT ACTION TO FURTHER THE CONSPIRACY ACTION TO FURTHER THE CONSPIRACY OUTLINED ABOVE. OUTLINED ABOVE. THESE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST NIXON THESE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST NIXON FROM 1974, AND THE EVIDENCE THAT FROM 1974, AND THE EVIDENCE THAT SUPPORTED THESE ALLEGATIONS SUPPORTED THESE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST NIXON, THEY’VE GOTTEN A AGAINST NIXON, THEY’VE GOTTEN A LOT OF ATTENTION THIS YEAR, LOT OF ATTENTION THIS YEAR, RIGHT? RIGHT? AND THAT’S IN PART BECAUSE A AND THAT’S IN PART BECAUSE A WHOLE BUNCH OF THIS STUFF ABOUT WHOLE BUNCH OF THIS STUFF ABOUT NIXON HAS BEEN UNSEALED, JUST NIXON HAS BEEN UNSEALED, JUST MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC FOR MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC FOR THE FIRST TIME, SO THERE’S THE FIRST TIME, SO THERE’S HISTORICAL INTEREST, BUT HISTORICAL INTEREST, BUT HONESTLY, WHAT IS DRIVING A LOT HONESTLY, WHAT IS DRIVING A LOT OF THAT HISTORICAL INTEREST, OF THAT HISTORICAL INTEREST, WHAT’S BEEN DRIVING THE EFFORT WHAT’S BEEN DRIVING THE EFFORT TO GET A BUNCH OF THIS STUFF TO GET A BUNCH OF THIS STUFF UNSEALED NOW, IS THE ALMOST UNSEALED NOW, IS THE ALMOST UNCANNILY PARALLEL EXPERIENCE WE UNCANNILY PARALLEL EXPERIENCE WE ARE HAVING RIGHT NOW IN OUR ARE HAVING RIGHT NOW IN OUR LIFETIME WHEN IT COMES TO OUR LIFETIME WHEN IT COMES TO OUR CURRENT PRESIDENT. CURRENT PRESIDENT. I MEAN, EVEN JUST LOOKING AT I MEAN, EVEN JUST LOOKING AT THIS ONE EXCHANGE OF THIS ONE EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION, BETWEEN THE INFORMATION, BETWEEN THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AND THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AND THE WATERGATE PROSECUTOR IN ’74, WATERGATE PROSECUTOR IN ’74, JUST PULL A COUPLE OF THOSE JUST PULL A COUPLE OF THOSE BULLET POINTS, SEE IF ANY OF BULLET POINTS, SEE IF ANY OF THESE THINGS RING A BELL, RIGHT? THESE THINGS RING A BELL, RIGHT? MAKING AND FACILITATING THE MAKING AND FACILITATING THE MAKING OF FALSE STATEMENTS AND MAKING OF FALSE STATEMENTS AND DECK HA RATIONLARATIONS ABOUT TH DECK HA RATIONLARATIONS ABOUT TH INVESTIGATION. INVESTIGATION. OBTAINING INFORMATION ABOUT THE OBTAINING INFORMATION ABOUT THE ONGOING INVESTIGATION FOR THE ONGOING INVESTIGATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DIE VERTING OR PURPOSE OF DIE VERTING OR THWARTING THAT INVESTIGATION. THWARTING THAT INVESTIGATION. THESE COULD BE CAPTIONS FOR A THESE COULD BE CAPTIONS FOR A PICTURE BOOK TOUR FOR THE NIXON PICTURE BOOK TOUR FOR THE NIXON OR TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, EITHER OR TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, EITHER WAY. WAY. WHEN IT CAME TO NIXON, IT TURNED WHEN IT CAME TO NIXON, IT TURNED OUT AT THE TIME, AND WE CAN NOW OUT AT THE TIME, AND WE CAN NOW SEE MORE CLEARLY THAN EVER, 45 SEE MORE CLEARLY THAN EVER, 45 YEARS DOWN THE LINE, IT TURNED YEARS DOWN THE LINE, IT TURNED OUT THERE WERE MOUNTAINS OF THIS OUT THERE WERE MOUNTAINS OF THIS STUFF, THIS EVIDENCE OF NIXON’S STUFF, THIS EVIDENCE OF NIXON’S CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR, MOUNTAINS OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR, MOUNTAINS OF THIS STUFF THAT WAS TURNED UP BY THIS STUFF THAT WAS TURNED UP BY FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS. FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS. NOW, IN OUR LIFETIME, WE KNOW NOW, IN OUR LIFETIME, WE KNOW VERY LITTLE ABOUT WHAT FEDERAL VERY LITTLE ABOUT WHAT FEDERAL PROSECUTORS AND INVESTIGATORS PROSECUTORS AND INVESTIGATORS HAVE ABOUT OUR CURRENT HAVE ABOUT OUR CURRENT PRESIDENT. PRESIDENT. BUT NEVERTHELESS, WE HAVE STILL BUT NEVERTHELESS, WE HAVE STILL GOT OUR OWN MOUNTAIN OF GOT OUR OWN MOUNTAIN OF REPORTING AND EVIDENCE, ABOUT A REPORTING AND EVIDENCE, ABOUT A BIGGER NUMBER OF ALLEGED BIGGER NUMBER OF ALLEGED OBSTRUCTION BY THE PRESIDENT. OBSTRUCTION BY THE PRESIDENT. JUST STUFF TURNED UP BY JUST STUFF TURNED UP BY INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING AND JUST INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING AND JUST ADMITTED TO BY THE PRESIDENT AND ADMITTED TO BY THE PRESIDENT AND OTHER SENIOR FIGURES THEM OTHER SENIOR FIGURES THEM SOUTHEAST S SOUTHEAST S SELVES OR JUST COMMITTED OPENLY SELVES OR JUST COMMITTED OPENLY OUT LOUD, TO THE POINT WHERE OUT LOUD, TO THE POINT WHERE IT’S BEEN SQUIRMINGLY AWKWARD IT’S BEEN SQUIRMINGLY AWKWARD FOR THOSE INVOLVED. FOR THOSE INVOLVED. >> HAVE YOU TALKED ABOUT THIS >> HAVE YOU TALKED ABOUT THIS ISSUE WITH ADMIRAL ROGERS? ISSUE WITH ADMIRAL ROGERS? >> THAT IS -- THAT IS SOMETHING >> THAT IS -- THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I, UM, WOULD LIKE TO THAT I, UM, WOULD LIKE TO WITHHOLD, THAT QUESTION AT THIS WITHHOLD, THAT QUESTION AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT IN TIME. PARTICULAR POINT IN TIME. >> THAT EXCRUCIATINGLY PREGNANT >> THAT EXCRUCIATINGLY PREGNANT NINE-SECOND LONG PAUSE, BROUGHT NINE-SECOND LONG PAUSE, BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE DIRECTOR OF TO YOU BY THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, THAT WAS NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, THAT WAS THE DAY AFTER NBC NEWS REPORTED THE DAY AFTER NBC NEWS REPORTED THAT THE PRESIDENT ASKED HIM, THAT THE PRESIDENT ASKED HIM, AND ALSO THE HEAD OF THE AND ALSO THE HEAD OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, HEAD NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, HEAD OF THE NSA, ADMIRAL MIKE ROGERS, OF THE NSA, ADMIRAL MIKE ROGERS, NBC REPORTED THAT THE PRESIDENT NBC REPORTED THAT THE PRESIDENT ASKED THEM BOTH TO MAKE PUBLIC ASKED THEM BOTH TO MAKE PUBLIC STATEMENTS SAYING THAT THEY AND STATEMENTS SAYING THAT THEY AND THEIR AGENCIES KNEW THAT THEIR AGENCIES KNEW THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP AND HIS CAPTAIN PRESIDENT TRUMP AND HIS CAPTAIN PAIN HAD PAIN HAD -- HIS CAMPAIGN HADN’T COLLUDED -- HIS CAMPAIGN HADN’T COLLUDED WITH RUSSIA. WITH RUSSIA. THE DAY BEFORE THAT NINE-SECOND THE DAY BEFORE THAT NINE-SECOND PAUSE, NBC REPORTED THAT NOT PAUSE, NBC REPORTED THAT NOT ONLY HAD PRESIDENT TRUMP ONLY HAD PRESIDENT TRUMP DIRECTED HIM AS THE DIRECTOR OF DIRECTED HIM AS THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND ALSO NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND ALSO THE HEAD OF THE NSA TO MAKE THE HEAD OF THE NSA TO MAKE THOSE PUBLIC STATEMENTS TO THOSE PUBLIC STATEMENTS TO UNDERMINE THE RUSSIA UNDERMINE THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION, BUT ALSO THE TWO INVESTIGATION, BUT ALSO THE TWO OF THEM, HEAD OF THE NSA, HEAD OF THEM, HEAD OF THE NSA, HEAD OF THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF OF THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, THE TWO NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, THE TWO OF THEM TALKED TO EACH OTHER OF THEM TALKED TO EACH OTHER ABOUT THAT REQUEST FROM THE ABOUT THAT REQUEST FROM THE PRESIDENT. PRESIDENT. SORT OF COMPARED NOTES AFTER THE SORT OF COMPARED NOTES AFTER THE PRESIDENT APPROACHED THEM BOTH. PRESIDENT APPROACHED THEM BOTH. >> I’LL ASK BOTH OF YOU THE SAME >> I’LL ASK BOTH OF YOU THE SAME QUESTION, WHY ARE YOU NOT QUESTION, WHY ARE YOU NOT ANSWERING THESE QUESTIONS? ANSWERING THESE QUESTIONS? IS THERE AN INVOCATION BY THE IS THERE AN INVOCATION BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, IS THERE OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, IS THERE OR NOT? OR NOT? >> NOT THAT I’M AWARE OF. >> NOT THAT I’M AWARE OF. >> WHY ARE YOU NOT -- >> WHY ARE YOU NOT -- >> I FEEL IT IS INAPPROPRIATE, >> I FEEL IT IS INAPPROPRIATE, SENATOR. SENATOR. >> WHAT YOU FEEL ISN’T RELEVANT, >> WHAT YOU FEEL ISN’T RELEVANT, ADMIRAL. ADMIRAL. WHAT YOU FEEL ISN’T THE WHAT YOU FEEL ISN’T THE ANSWER -- WHY ARE YOU NOT ANSWER -- WHY ARE YOU NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS? ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS? IS IT AN INNOVATION OF EXECUTIVE IS IT AN INNOVATION OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE? PRIVILEGE? IF THERE IS, LET’S KNOW ABOUT IF THERE IS, LET’S KNOW ABOUT IT. IT. IF THERE ISN’T, ANSWER THE IF THERE ISN’T, ANSWER THE QUESTIONS. QUESTIONS. >> I STAND BY MY COMMENTS, I >> I STAND BY MY COMMENTS, I DON’T MEAN THAT IN A CONTENTIOUS DON’T MEAN THAT IN A CONTENTIOUS WAY. WAY. >> I DO MEAN IT IN A CONTENTIOUS >> I DO MEAN IT IN A CONTENTIOUS WAY. WAY. I DON’T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU’RE I DON’T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU’RE NOT ANSWERING OUR QUESTIONS. NOT ANSWERING OUR QUESTIONS. WHEN YOU WERE CONFIRMED BEFORE WHEN YOU WERE CONFIRMED BEFORE THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE, THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE, YOU TOOK AN OATH. YOU TOOK AN OATH. DO YOU SWEAR TO GIVE THE DO YOU SWEAR TO GIVE THE COMMITTEE THE TRUTH, THE FULL COMMITTEE THE TRUTH, THE FULL TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD, AND YOU TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD, AND YOU ANSWERED YES TO THAT. ANSWERED YES TO THAT. >> AND I ANSWERED THAT THOSE >> AND I ANSWERED THAT THOSE CONVERSATIONS ARE CLASSIFIED. CONVERSATIONS ARE CLASSIFIED. AND IT’S NOT APPROPRIATE TO AND IT’S NOT APPROPRIATE TO DISCUSS THOSE CONVERSATIONS. DISCUSS THOSE CONVERSATIONS. >> WHAT IS CLASSIFIED WHETHER OR >> WHAT IS CLASSIFIED WHETHER OR NOT YOU SHOULD INTERVENE IN THE NOT YOU SHOULD INTERVENE IN THE FBI INVESTIGATION? FBI INVESTIGATION? >> I STAND BY MY PREVIOUS >> I STAND BY MY PREVIOUS COMMENTS. COMMENTS. >> MR. COTES, WHAT IS THE BASIS >> MR. COTES, WHAT IS THE BASIS FOR YOUR REFUSAL TO ANSWER THESE FOR YOUR REFUSAL TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS TODAY? QUESTIONS TODAY? >> THE BASIS IS THAT WHAT I HAVE >> THE BASIS IS THAT WHAT I HAVE PREVIOUSLY EXPLAINED. PREVIOUSLY EXPLAINED. I DO NOT BELIEVE IT IS I DO NOT BELIEVE IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO -- APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO -- >> WHAT’S THE BASIS -- I’M NOT >> WHAT’S THE BASIS -- I’M NOT SATISFIED CAN, I DO NOT BELIEVE SATISFIED CAN, I DO NOT BELIEVE IT’S APPROPRIATE OR I DO NOT IT’S APPROPRIATE OR I DO NOT FEEL I SHOULD ANSWER. FEEL I SHOULD ANSWER. I WANT TO ANSWER A LEGAL BASIS, I WANT TO ANSWER A LEGAL BASIS, YOU SWORE THAT OATH TO TELL US YOU SWORE THAT OATH TO TELL US THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, AND TODAY NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, AND TODAY YOU ARE REFUSING TO DO SO. YOU ARE REFUSING TO DO SO. WHAT IS THE LEGAL BASIS FOR YOUR WHAT IS THE LEGAL BASIS FOR YOUR REFUSAL TO TESTIFY TO THIS REFUSAL TO TESTIFY TO THIS COMMIT ANY COMMIT ANY >> I’M NOT SURE I HAVE A LEGAL >> I’M NOT SURE I HAVE A LEGAL BASIS. BASIS. >> SO ALREADY THIS STUFF IS OUT >> SO ALREADY THIS STUFF IS OUT THERE, RIGHT? THERE, RIGHT? THAT’S WHY THESE SENATORS ARE THAT’S WHY THESE SENATORS ARE ABLE TO ASK THESE QUESTIONS. ABLE TO ASK THESE QUESTIONS. IN THIS CASE, SENATOR KING OF IN THIS CASE, SENATOR KING OF MAINE, RIGHT? MAINE, RIGHT? THOSE TWO INTELLIGENCE AGENCY THOSE TWO INTELLIGENCE AGENCY CHIEFS ARE ON THE HOTSEAT THERE CHIEFS ARE ON THE HOTSEAT THERE BECAUSE OF PUBLIC REPORTS THAT BECAUSE OF PUBLIC REPORTS THAT THESE SENIOR INTELLIGENCE THESE SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICIALS, DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL OFFICIALS, DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, HEAD OF THE NSA, INTELLIGENCE, HEAD OF THE NSA, THE PRESIDENT ASKED THEM TO MAKE THE PRESIDENT ASKED THEM TO MAKE STATEMENTS EXONERATING THE STATEMENTS EXONERATING THE PRESIDENT IN THE RUSSIA PRESIDENT IN THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION. INVESTIGATION. IN FACT, THE DAY BEFORE THAT IN FACT, THE DAY BEFORE THAT EXCHANGE WITH ANGUS KING, "THE EXCHANGE WITH ANGUS KING, "THE WASHINGTON POST" REPORTED THAT WASHINGTON POST" REPORTED THAT THE PRESIDENT ASKED FOR THESE THE PRESIDENT ASKED FOR THESE EXONERATING STATEMENTINGS, BUT EXONERATING STATEMENTINGS, BUT ASKED THEM TO TELL THE FBI TO ASKED THEM TO TELL THE FBI TO STOP ITS INVESTIGATION ON THE STOP ITS INVESTIGATION ON THE RUSSIA MATTER. RUSSIA MATTER. INCLUDING SPECIFICALLY THEIR INCLUDING SPECIFICALLY THEIR INVESTIGATION INTO THE NATIONAL INVESTIGATION INTO THE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER, MIKE FLYNN. SECURITY ADVISER, MIKE FLYNN. SOME OF THE MOST POWERFUL SOME OF THE MOST POWERFUL OBSTRUCTION EVIDENCE AGAINST OBSTRUCTION EVIDENCE AGAINST NIXON FROM THE ’70s, SOME OF THE NIXON FROM THE ’70s, SOME OF THE EVIDENCE THAT IS STILL THE MOST EVIDENCE THAT IS STILL THE MOST WIDELY REMEMBERED STUFF, ALL WIDELY REMEMBERED STUFF, ALL THESE DECADES LATER, SOME OF THE THESE DECADES LATER, SOME OF THE MOST WIDELY REMEMBERED PARTS OF MOST WIDELY REMEMBERED PARTS OF HIS OBSTRUCTION EFFORT IS WHEN HIS OBSTRUCTION EFFORT IS WHEN HE TRIED TO BLOCK THE FBI HE TRIED TO BLOCK THE FBI INVESTIGATION BY USING THE INVESTIGATION BY USING THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, BY USING INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, BY USING THE CIA, TELLING THE FBI THERE THE CIA, TELLING THE FBI THERE IS STUFF THEY COULDN’T LOOK IS STUFF THEY COULDN’T LOOK INTO, BECAUSE THOSE WERE CIA INTO, BECAUSE THOSE WERE CIA MATTERS, TRYING TO ENLIST THE MATTERS, TRYING TO ENLIST THE CIA IN AN EFFORT TO COVER UP CIA IN AN EFFORT TO COVER UP WHAT HE HAD DONE AND TO STOP THE WHAT HE HAD DONE AND TO STOP THE FBI INVESTIGATION THAT WAS GOING FBI INVESTIGATION THAT WAS GOING TO EXPOS HIM. TO EXPOS HIM. WHEN IT COMES TO PRESIDENT WHEN IT COMES TO PRESIDENT TRUMP, APPARENTLY TRYING THE TRUMP, APPARENTLY TRYING THE SAME THING, NOT ONLY DID HE SAME THING, NOT ONLY DID HE REPORTEDLY ASK THE HEADS OF TWO REPORTEDLY ASK THE HEADS OF TWO INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES TO HELP INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES TO HELP HIM OUT WHEN IT CAME TO PUBLIC HIM OUT WHEN IT CAME TO PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF THE RUSSIA PERCEPTIONS OF THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION, HE SPECIFICALLY INVESTIGATION, HE SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED THAT THEY SHOULD REQUESTED THAT THEY SHOULD INTERVENE WITH THE FBI, TELL THE INTERVENE WITH THE FBI, TELL THE FBI TO BACK OFF. FBI TO BACK OFF. AND ACCORDING TO "THE WASHINGTON AND ACCORDING TO "THE WASHINGTON POST," THAT REQUEST WAS MADE POST," THAT REQUEST WAS MADE WHILE ANOTHER SENIOR OFFICIAL WHILE ANOTHER SENIOR OFFICIAL WAS IN THE ROOM AND WITNESSED WAS IN THE ROOM AND WITNESSED IT. IT. A MAN NAMED MIKE POMPEO, WHO AT A MAN NAMED MIKE POMPEO, WHO AT THE TIME OF THIS INCIDENT, WAS THE TIME OF THIS INCIDENT, WAS THE HEAD OF THE CIA. THE HEAD OF THE CIA. HE’S SINCE GONE ON TO BECOME HE’S SINCE GONE ON TO BECOME SECRETARY OF STATE. SECRETARY OF STATE. HERE’S HOW HE ANSWERED QUESTIONS HERE’S HOW HE ANSWERED QUESTIONS THE DAY HE WAS IN THE ROOM, IN THE DAY HE WAS IN THE ROOM, IN THE WHITE HOUSE, WHEN HE WAS THE THE WHITE HOUSE, WHEN HE WAS THE SUPPOSED WITNESS TO THE SUPPOSED WITNESS TO THE PRESIDENT TRYING TO ENLIST THE PRESIDENT TRYING TO ENLIST THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE TO KIBOSH THE INTELLIGENCE TO KIBOSH THE INVESTIGATION INTO HIS CAMPAIGN INVESTIGATION INTO HIS CAMPAIGN AS A HISTORICAL MIRROR TO WHAT AS A HISTORICAL MIRROR TO WHAT NIXON GOT BUSTED FOR. NIXON GOT BUSTED FOR. >> SO DIRECTOR, THIS ACCOUNT >> SO DIRECTOR, THIS ACCOUNT STRONGLY SUGGESTS THAT THE STRONGLY SUGGESTS THAT THE PRESIDENT ASKED YOU AND DIRECTOR PRESIDENT ASKED YOU AND DIRECTOR COTES TO INTERFERE WITH THEN FBI COTES TO INTERFERE WITH THEN FBI DIRECTOR COMEY’S INVESTIGATIONS DIRECTOR COMEY’S INVESTIGATIONS INTO THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN’S INTO THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN’S CONTACTS WITH RUSSIA. CONTACTS WITH RUSSIA. WHAT DID PRESIDENT TRUMP SAY TO WHAT DID PRESIDENT TRUMP SAY TO YOU AND DIRECTOR COTES IN THAT YOU AND DIRECTOR COTES IN THAT MEETING? MEETING? >> SENATOR, I’M NOT GOING TO >> SENATOR, I’M NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE CONVERSATION THE TALK ABOUT THE CONVERSATION THE PRESIDENT AND I HAD. PRESIDENT AND I HAD. >> DID HE ASK YOU TO DO ANYTHING >> DID HE ASK YOU TO DO ANYTHING AS IT RELATES TO THAT AS IT RELATES TO THAT INVESTIGATION? INVESTIGATION? >> SENATOR, I DON’T RECALL WHAT >> SENATOR, I DON’T RECALL WHAT HE ASKED ME THAT DAY. HE ASKED ME THAT DAY. >> I, I, MM, WHY WOULD SOMETHING >> I, I, MM, WHY WOULD SOMETHING LIKE THAT STAND OUT? LIKE THAT STAND OUT? THE PRESIDENT IN THE OVAL OFFICE THE PRESIDENT IN THE OVAL OFFICE COMMITTING BLATANT OBSTRUCTION COMMITTING BLATANT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE WHEN IT’S JUST YOU AS OF JUSTICE WHEN IT’S JUST YOU AS THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. INTELLIGENCE. THE PRESIDENT ASKED EVERYBODY THE PRESIDENT ASKED EVERYBODY ELSE TO LEAVE AND MAKES THIS ELSE TO LEAVE AND MAKES THIS REQUEST, WILL YOU PLEASE SHUT REQUEST, WILL YOU PLEASE SHUT OFF THE INVESTIGATION INTO ME, OFF THE INVESTIGATION INTO ME, WILL YOU MAKE THE FBI STOP WILL YOU MAKE THE FBI STOP INVESTIGATING ME? INVESTIGATING ME? WHY WOULD YOU REMEMBER THAT? WHY WOULD YOU REMEMBER THAT? HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, RIGHT? HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, RIGHT? WHY WOULD YOU RECALL? WHY WOULD YOU RECALL? YOU KNOW, MAYBE IT DOES HAPPEN YOU KNOW, MAYBE IT DOES HAPPEN ALL THE TIME. ALL THE TIME. I MEAN, JUST LOOK AT WHERE WE I MEAN, JUST LOOK AT WHERE WE ARE NOW. ARE NOW. LOOK AT THE HEIGHT TO WHICH WE LOOK AT THE HEIGHT TO WHICH WE HAVE RISEN. HAVE RISEN. WITH NIXON, IT WAS A REVELATION WITH NIXON, IT WAS A REVELATION AT THE END, ALL THE STUFF WE AT THE END, ALL THE STUFF WE LEARNED THAT WE HAD DONE, ALL LEARNED THAT WE HAD DONE, ALL THE STUFF THAT PROSECUTORS AND THE STUFF THAT PROSECUTORS AND INVESTIGATORS COLLECTED EVIDENCE INVESTIGATORS COLLECTED EVIDENCE OF IN TERMS OF HIS CRIMINAL OF IN TERMS OF HIS CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR. BEHAVIOR. WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP, IT’S BEEN WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP, IT’S BEEN A MOUNTAIN THAT’S BEEN BUILT UP A MOUNTAIN THAT’S BEEN BUILT UP IN PUBLIC, STONE BY STONE, FROM IN PUBLIC, STONE BY STONE, FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, FROM THE THE VERY BEGINNING, FROM THE VERY START OF THIS PRESIDENCY. VERY START OF THIS PRESIDENCY. I MEAN, PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS NOT I MEAN, PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS NOT CREDIBLY DENIED ANY OF THIS. CREDIBLY DENIED ANY OF THIS. HE ASKED FBI DIRECTOR JAMES HE ASKED FBI DIRECTOR JAMES COMEY TO LAY OFF THE FBI COMEY TO LAY OFF THE FBI INVESTIGATION INTO MICHAEL FLYNN INVESTIGATION INTO MICHAEL FLYNN AS IT PERTAINED TO RUSSIA. AS IT PERTAINED TO RUSSIA. HE FIRED JAMES COMEY AS THE HEAD HE FIRED JAMES COMEY AS THE HEAD OF THE FBI AFTER COMEY REFUSED OF THE FBI AFTER COMEY REFUSED TO DO THAT AND MAKE EXONERATING TO DO THAT AND MAKE EXONERATING STATEMENTS ABOUT THE PRESIDENT. STATEMENTS ABOUT THE PRESIDENT. THE PRESIDENT ALSO TOLD ATTORNEY THE PRESIDENT ALSO TOLD ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS, DIRECTED GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS, DIRECTED HIM THAT HE SHOULDN’T FOLLOW THE HIM THAT HE SHOULDN’T FOLLOW THE PROFESSIONAL ETHICS ADVICE OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICS ADVICE OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, SHOULD. THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, SHOULD. FOLLOW JUSTICE DEPARTMENT RULES, FOLLOW JUSTICE DEPARTMENT RULES, HE SHOULD DEFY THAT ADVICE AND HE SHOULD DEFY THAT ADVICE AND RULES AND NOT RECUSE HIMSELF RULES AND NOT RECUSE HIMSELF FROM OVERSEEING THE RUSSIA FROM OVERSEEING THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION, BECAUSE THE INVESTIGATION, BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT BELIEVED THAT CAUSED PRESIDENT BELIEVED THAT CAUSED HIM TO LOSE CONTROL OF THE HIM TO LOSE CONTROL OF THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION. RUSSIA INVESTIGATION. THE PRESIDENT TOLD THEN ATTORNEY THE PRESIDENT TOLD THEN ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS OUT LOUD GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS OUT LOUD AND IN PUBLIC IN WRITING THAT HE AND IN PUBLIC IN WRITING THAT HE NEEDED TO STOP THE RUSSIA NEEDED TO STOP THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION "RIGHT NOW." INVESTIGATION "RIGHT NOW." ONE OF THE PRESIDENT’S LAWYERS ONE OF THE PRESIDENT’S LAWYERS QUICKLY TRIED TO EXPLAIN THAT QUICKLY TRIED TO EXPLAIN THAT AWAY BY SAYING IT’S NOT A CALL AWAY BY SAYING IT’S NOT A CALL TO ACTION. TO ACTION. TO BE CLEAR THE EXACT QUOTE OF TO BE CLEAR THE EXACT QUOTE OF THE PRESIDENT OUT LOUD, IN THE PRESIDENT OUT LOUD, IN PUBLIC, WAS THIS, "ATTORNEY PUBLIC, WAS THIS, "ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS SHOULD GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS SHOULD STOP THIS RIGGED WITCH HUNT STOP THIS RIGGED WITCH HUNT RIGHT NOW." RIGHT NOW." THAT’S NOT A CALL TO ACTION. THAT’S NOT A CALL TO ACTION. IT WAS LIKE A FORTUNE COOKIE IT WAS LIKE A FORTUNE COOKIE THING, WE DON’T KNOW WHAT HE THING, WE DON’T KNOW WHAT HE MEANT. MEANT. IT’S AMBIGUOUS. IT’S AMBIGUOUS. JUST TODAY, OUT LOUD, ONLINE, JUST TODAY, OUT LOUD, ONLINE, THE PRESIDENT POSTED AN IMAGE THE PRESIDENT POSTED AN IMAGE SUGGESTING THAT THE DEPUTY SUGGESTING THAT THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL, WHO UNTIL ATTORNEY GENERAL, WHO UNTIL RECENTLY OVERSAW THE RUSSIA RECENTLY OVERSAW THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION, HE SHOULD BE INVESTIGATION, HE SHOULD BE JAILED AND TRIED FOR TREASON. JAILED AND TRIED FOR TREASON. THE PRESIDENT WAS ASKED JUST THE PRESIDENT WAS ASKED JUST TONIGHT "WHY DID YOU THINK ROD TONIGHT "WHY DID YOU THINK ROD ROSENSTEIN BELONGS BEHIND BARS?" ROSENSTEIN BELONGS BEHIND BARS?" THE PRESIDENT RESPONDED, HE THE PRESIDENT RESPONDED, HE SHOULD HAVE NEVER PICKED A SHOULD HAVE NEVER PICKED A SPECIAL COUNSEL. SPECIAL COUNSEL. SO THE PRESIDENT SAYING A TOP SO THE PRESIDENT SAYING A TOP JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL SHOULD BE JAILED AND CHARGED SHOULD BE JAILED AND CHARGED WITH A CRIME, WHICH IS CAPITAL WITH A CRIME, WHICH IS CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, FOR HAVING APPOINTED PUNISHMENT, FOR HAVING APPOINTED A SPECIAL COUNSEL IN THE RUSSIA A SPECIAL COUNSEL IN THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION. INVESTIGATION. IN THAT ONGOING INVESTIGATION. IN THAT ONGOING INVESTIGATION. THE PRESIDENT, IN JUNE OF LAST THE PRESIDENT, IN JUNE OF LAST YEAR, TOLD HIS WHITE HOUSE YEAR, TOLD HIS WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL TO FIRE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TO FIRE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL LEADING THE RUSSIA COUNSEL LEADING THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION. INVESTIGATION. THE PRESIDENT IN DECEMBER DID THE PRESIDENT IN DECEMBER DID THE SAME THING AGAIN. THE SAME THING AGAIN. THE PRESIDENT, ON AUGUST 9th OF THE PRESIDENT, ON AUGUST 9th OF LAST YEAR PLACED A PHONE CALL LAST YEAR PLACED A PHONE CALL FROM HIS GOLF CLUB IN NEW JERSEY FROM HIS GOLF CLUB IN NEW JERSEY TO THE MAJORITY LEADER IN THE TO THE MAJORITY LEADER IN THE SENATE, MITCH McCONNELL, AND SENATE, MITCH McCONNELL, AND EXCORIATING McCONNELL FOR EXCORIATING McCONNELL FOR REFUSING TO PROTECT HIM, THE REFUSING TO PROTECT HIM, THE PRESIDENT, FROM INVESTIGATIONS PRESIDENT, FROM INVESTIGATIONS OF RUSSIA INTERFERENCE IN THE OF RUSSIA INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 ELECTION. 2016 ELECTION. MULTIPLE REPUBLICANS WERE MULTIPLE REPUBLICANS WERE BRIEFED ON THAT CONVERSATION, IN BRIEFED ON THAT CONVERSATION, IN WHICH THE PRESIDENT CALLED THE WHICH THE PRESIDENT CALLED THE SENATE MAJORITY LEADER. SENATE MAJORITY LEADER. THEIR ACCOUNTS THEN MADE THEIR THEIR ACCOUNTS THEN MADE THEIR WAY INTO "THE NEW YORK TIMES." WAY INTO "THE NEW YORK TIMES." IT WAS NEVER EVEN HALF HEARTEDLY IT WAS NEVER EVEN HALF HEARTEDLY DENIED BY THE PRESIDENT. DENIED BY THE PRESIDENT. EVEN MORE SPECIFICALLY THAN EVEN MORE SPECIFICALLY THAN THAT, THE PRESIDENT REPEATEDLY THAT, THE PRESIDENT REPEATEDLY DIRECTED NOT ONLY MITCH DIRECTED NOT ONLY MITCH McCONNELL BUT ALSO ANOTHER McCONNELL BUT ALSO ANOTHER REPUBLICAN AND SENATE REPUBLICAN AND SENATE LEADERSHIP, SENATOR ROY BLOUNT LEADERSHIP, SENATOR ROY BLOUNT AND SENATOR RICHARD BURR, THAT AND SENATOR RICHARD BURR, THAT THEY SHOULD STOP THE THEY SHOULD STOP THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE INVESTIGATION INTO RUSSIAN INVESTIGATION INTO RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE. INTERFERENCE. AGAIN, THIS ISN’T CONTESTED BY AGAIN, THIS ISN’T CONTESTED BY ANYBODY INVOLVED. ANYBODY INVOLVED. THE SENATOR CONFIRMED THAT YEAH, THE SENATOR CONFIRMED THAT YEAH, THE PRESIDENT DID CONTACT HIM THE PRESIDENT DID CONTACT HIM AND TELL HIM TO END THE RUSSIA AND TELL HIM TO END THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION IN THE SENATE. INVESTIGATION IN THE SENATE. THE PRESIDENT HAS ALSO THE PRESIDENT HAS ALSO PERSONALLY PARTICIPATED IN PERSONALLY PARTICIPATED IN CONCOCTING FALSE PUBLIC CONCOCTING FALSE PUBLIC STATEMENTS ABOUT KEY ISSUES THAT STATEMENTS ABOUT KEY ISSUES THAT ARE PART OF THE INVESTIGATION, ARE PART OF THE INVESTIGATION, INCLUDING THE FALSE STATEMENT HE INCLUDING THE FALSE STATEMENT HE DRAFTED IN THE NAME OF HIS DRAFTED IN THE NAME OF HIS ELDEST SON, CLAIMING A MEETING ELDEST SON, CLAIMING A MEETING WITH RUSSIANS TO OBTAIN DAMAGING WITH RUSSIANS TO OBTAIN DAMAGING INFORMATION ABOUT HILLARY INFORMATION ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON WAS A MEETING ABOUT CLINTON WAS A MEETING ABOUT RUSSIAN ADOPTIONS. RUSSIAN ADOPTIONS. YOU’RE LIKE, OH, THAT’S CUTE. YOU’RE LIKE, OH, THAT’S CUTE. THE NEWS FLASH THAT THE THE NEWS FLASH THAT THE PRESIDENT LIED ABOUT A THING PRESIDENT LIED ABOUT A THING ISN’T NEWS ANYMORE. ISN’T NEWS ANYMORE. I KNOW, I KNOW,KY HEAR YOU I KNOW, I KNOW,KY HEAR YOU THROUGH THE TV. THROUGH THE TV. THAT MAY BE SO, THE PRESIDENT THAT MAY BE SO, THE PRESIDENT LIES, IS LIKE, YOU KNOW, DOG LIES, IS LIKE, YOU KNOW, DOG BITES MAN. BITES MAN. IT MAY BE SO THAT’S NO LONGER IT MAY BE SO THAT’S NO LONGER NEWS. NEWS. GOD REST OUR SOULS FOR THAT. GOD REST OUR SOULS FOR THAT. BUT IN THE CONTEXT OF A KEY BUT IN THE CONTEXT OF A KEY MATTER THAT IS ACTIVELY UNDER MATTER THAT IS ACTIVELY UNDER CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION, CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION, CONCOCTING A FALSE PUBLIC CONCOCTING A FALSE PUBLIC STATEMENT TO MISLEAD STATEMENT TO MISLEAD INVESTIGATORS ABOUT THE NATURE INVESTIGATORS ABOUT THE NATURE OF THAT INCIDENT, THAT ISN’T OF THAT INCIDENT, THAT ISN’T JUST YOUR RUN OF THE MILL JUST YOUR RUN OF THE MILL PRESIDENTIAL LIE, LEGALLY THAT PRESIDENTIAL LIE, LEGALLY THAT COULD BE A PROBLEM. COULD BE A PROBLEM. GO BACK TO ’74. GO BACK TO ’74. GO BACK TO THE SUMMER OF ’74 FOR GO BACK TO THE SUMMER OF ’74 FOR WHAT NIXON GOT IN TROUBLE WITH, WHAT NIXON GOT IN TROUBLE WITH, RIGHT? RIGHT? THE PRESIDENT JOINED AN ONGOING THE PRESIDENT JOINED AN ONGOING CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY TO ON SFRUKT CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY TO ON SFRUKT A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION, A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION, INCLUDING MAKING FALSE INCLUDING MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS AND DECLARATIONS. STATEMENTS AND DECLARATIONS. AND WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN AND WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN OUT IN PUBLIC, OPEN SOURCE OUT IN PUBLIC, OPEN SOURCE REPORTING THAT THE PRESIDENT’S REPORTING THAT THE PRESIDENT’S RUSSIA LAWYERS WENT PRIVATELY TO RUSSIA LAWYERS WENT PRIVATELY TO TWO CRUCIAL FIGURES IN THE TWO CRUCIAL FIGURES IN THE ONGOING INVESTIGATION, MIKE NINE ONGOING INVESTIGATION, MIKE NINE AND PAUL MANAFORT, AND TALKED AND PAUL MANAFORT, AND TALKED WITH THEIR LAWYERS ABOUT WITH THEIR LAWYERS ABOUT POTENTIALLY RECEIVING PARDONS POTENTIALLY RECEIVING PARDONS FROM THE PRESIDENT. FROM THE PRESIDENT. THIS AT A TIME WHEN BOTH MEN THIS AT A TIME WHEN BOTH MEN WERE ALREADY COOPERATING WITH OR WERE ALREADY COOPERATING WITH OR CONSIDERING COOPERATING WITH CONSIDERING COOPERATING WITH FEDERAL PROSECUTORS IN THEIR FEDERAL PROSECUTORS IN THEIR INVESTIGATION OF THE PRESIDENT. INVESTIGATION OF THE PRESIDENT. JUST TODAY, IN AN INTERVIEW, THE JUST TODAY, IN AN INTERVIEW, THE PRESIDENT PUBLICLY FLOATED THE PRESIDENT PUBLICLY FLOATED THE IDEA OF A PARDON FOR HIS IDEA OF A PARDON FOR HIS CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN PAUL MANAFORT. CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN PAUL MANAFORT. WHY WOULD I TAKE THIS OFF THE WHY WOULD I TAKE THIS OFF THE TABLE? TABLE? WITH THE PRESIDENT’S LAWYERS NOW WITH THE PRESIDENT’S LAWYERS NOW BRAGGING TO "THE NEW YORK TIMES" BRAGGING TO "THE NEW YORK TIMES" AS OF LAST NIGHT THAT WHILE AS OF LAST NIGHT THAT WHILE MANAFORT WAS SUPPOSEDLY MANAFORT WAS SUPPOSEDLY COOPERATING WITH THEM, THEY IN COOPERATING WITH THEM, THEY IN FACT WERE ACTUALLY USING HIM AS FACT WERE ACTUALLY USING HIM AS A SOURCE OF INTEL TO FIND OUT ON A SOURCE OF INTEL TO FIND OUT ON BEHALF OF THE PRESIDENT WHAT WAS BEHALF OF THE PRESIDENT WHAT WAS GOING ON INSIDE THE SPECIAL GOING ON INSIDE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE, WHAT MUELLER’S COUNSEL’S OFFICE, WHAT MUELLER’S PROSECUTORS WERE ASKING ABOUT PROSECUTORS WERE ASKING ABOUT AND WHAT THEY WERE FOCUSING ON. AND WHAT THEY WERE FOCUSING ON. AND WE’VE HEARD SOME OTHER AND WE’VE HEARD SOME OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE PRESIDENT’S ELEMENTS OF THE PRESIDENT’S BEHAVIOR THAT SOUND LIKE THIS BEHAVIOR THAT SOUND LIKE THIS BEFORE, IT WAS REPORTED IN MARCH BEFORE, IT WAS REPORTED IN MARCH BY "THE NEW YORK TIMES" THAT THE BY "THE NEW YORK TIMES" THAT THE PRESIDENT ASKED A COUPLE OF PRESIDENT ASKED A COUPLE OF OTHER KEY WITNESSES WHO SPENT A OTHER KEY WITNESSES WHO SPENT A LOT OF TIME WITH MUELLER’S LOT OF TIME WITH MUELLER’S PROSECUTORS, DON McGHAN AND PROSECUTORS, DON McGHAN AND REINCE PRIEBUS, FORMER WHITE REINCE PRIEBUS, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF. HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF. "THE NEW YORK TIMES" REPORTED "THE NEW YORK TIMES" REPORTED THAT THE PRESIDENT ASKED BOTH OF THAT THE PRESIDENT ASKED BOTH OF THEM DETAILED QUESTIONS ABOUT THEM DETAILED QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR INTERACTIONS WITH THE THEIR INTERACTIONS WITH THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TO TRY TO GLEAN SPECIAL COUNSEL TO TRY TO GLEAN INFORMATION FROM THEM ABOUT THE INFORMATION FROM THEM ABOUT THE STATUS OF THE INVESTIGATION. STATUS OF THE INVESTIGATION. TALKING TO WITNESSES ABOUT THEIR TALKING TO WITNESSES ABOUT THEIR TESTIMONY TO THE SPECIAL TESTIMONY TO THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR. PROSECUTOR. BUT NOW, WITH THIS NEW BUT NOW, WITH THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT WITH MANAFORT, NOW DEVELOPMENT WITH MANAFORT, NOW THE PRESIDENT IS DOING THAT WITH THE PRESIDENT IS DOING THAT WITH A CONVICTED FELON, TO WHOM HE’S A CONVICTED FELON, TO WHOM HE’S OPENLY DANGLING A PARDON. OPENLY DANGLING A PARDON. I MEAN, IF YOU HAD BEEN SEALED I MEAN, IF YOU HAD BEEN SEALED IN A VAULT FOR THE LAST TWO IN A VAULT FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS, AND YOU CAME OUT TODAY YEARS, AND YOU CAME OUT TODAY AND SOMEBODY HANDED YOU THAT AND SOMEBODY HANDED YOU THAT LITANY OF BASICALLY UNCONTESTED LITANY OF BASICALLY UNCONTESTED DETAILED REPORTING AND EVIDENCE DETAILED REPORTING AND EVIDENCE ABOUT THE PRESIDENT’S EFFORTS TO ABOUT THE PRESIDENT’S EFFORTS TO OBSTRUCT THIS SERIOUS ONGOING OBSTRUCT THIS SERIOUS ONGOING CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION INTO CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION INTO HIMSELF AND HIS ADMINISTRATION HIMSELF AND HIS ADMINISTRATION AND THIS CAMPAIGN, YOU WOULD AND THIS CAMPAIGN, YOU WOULD THINK YOU WERE READING A THINK YOU WERE READING A BOMBSHELL INDICTMENT, RIGHT? BOMBSHELL INDICTMENT, RIGHT? THAT SIGNALED THE END OF A THAT SIGNALED THE END OF A PRESIDENCY, OR AT LEAST THE PRESIDENCY, OR AT LEAST THE MIDDLE OF IMPEACHMENT MIDDLE OF IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS, RIGHT? PROCEEDINGS, RIGHT? BUT INSTEAD THAT’S JUST THE BUT INSTEAD THAT’S JUST THE PUBLIC RECORD. PUBLIC RECORD. JUST PILED UP PIECE BY PIECE, JUST PILED UP PIECE BY PIECE, WEEK AFTER WEEK, MONTH AFTER WEEK AFTER WEEK, MONTH AFTER MONTH INTO WHAT HAS ENDED UP MONTH INTO WHAT HAS ENDED UP INTO A REALLY BIG MOUNTAIN OF INTO A REALLY BIG MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE JUST ON THE ISSUE OF EVIDENCE JUST ON THE ISSUE OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. YOU DON’T REALIZE HOW BIG THE YOU DON’T REALIZE HOW BIG THE MOUNTAIN IS UNTIL YOU REALIZE MOUNTAIN IS UNTIL YOU REALIZE HOW FAR DOWN THE GROUND IS, BUT HOW FAR DOWN THE GROUND IS, BUT WE’RE WAY UP HERE NOW. WE’RE WAY UP HERE NOW. ON THE DAY AFTER THE MIDTERM ON THE DAY AFTER THE MIDTERM ELECTION WHEN THE PRESIDENT ELECTION WHEN THE PRESIDENT FIRED ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF FIRED ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS AND INSTALLED MATT SESSIONS AND INSTALLED MATT WHITAKER IN HIS PLACE, HE WHITAKER IN HIS PLACE, HE ADMITTED ALMOST INSTANTLY IN AN ADMITTED ALMOST INSTANTLY IN AN INTERVIEW WITH THE DAILY CALLER INTERVIEW WITH THE DAILY CALLER HE PUT MATT WHITAKER THERE HE PUT MATT WHITAKER THERE BECAUSE OF THE RUSSIA BECAUSE OF THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION. INVESTIGATION. THERE AROSEMEAD IMMEDIATE CONCER THERE AROSEMEAD IMMEDIATE CONCER THAT HE WOULD SHUT DOWN THE THAT HE WOULD SHUT DOWN THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION, JUST MUELLER INVESTIGATION, JUST QUESTION OF WHEN AND HOW AND HOW QUESTION OF WHEN AND HOW AND HOW MUCH WE WOULD KNOW ABOUT IT. MUCH WE WOULD KNOW ABOUT IT. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, SOMEBODY SHORTLY THEREAFTER, SOMEBODY REALLY INTERESTING RAN A REALLY REALLY INTERESTING RAN A REALLY INTERESTING FLAG UP THE INTERESTING FLAG UP THE PROVERBIAL FLAGPOLE. PROVERBIAL FLAGPOLE. JAMES BAKER PUBLISHED A PIECE JAMES BAKER PUBLISHED A PIECE WHICH DREW ATTENTION TO A REALLY WHICH DREW ATTENTION TO A REALLY SPECIFIC PART OF THE LEGAL SPECIFIC PART OF THE LEGAL PRECEDENT OF PRESIDENTIAL PRECEDENT OF PRESIDENTIAL CRIMINAL MISBEHAVIOR HERE. CRIMINAL MISBEHAVIOR HERE. SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WHAT NIXON SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WHAT NIXON DID. DID. PART OF NIXON’S CRIMINAL HISTORY PART OF NIXON’S CRIMINAL HISTORY IS HE DID USE CONTACT WITH THE IS HE DID USE CONTACT WITH THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO SPY ON THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO SPY ON THE INVESTIGATION. INVESTIGATION. PART OF THE WAY NIXON DID THAT PART OF THE WAY NIXON DID THAT WAS HIS FREQUENT CONTACT WITH A WAS HIS FREQUENT CONTACT WITH A MAN WHO WAS THEN THE HEAD OF THE MAN WHO WAS THEN THE HEAD OF THE CRIMINAL DIVISION AT THE JUSTICE CRIMINAL DIVISION AT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. DEPARTMENT. HIS MEETINGS WITH HENRY HIS MEETINGS WITH HENRY PETERSON, HIS REPEATED CALLS PETERSON, HIS REPEATED CALLS WITH PETERSON, HE EXTRACTED KEY WITH PETERSON, HE EXTRACTED KEY INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON IN WATERGATE, WHAT WAS GOING ON IN WATERGATE, WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH KEY WITNESSES BEFORE THE ON WITH KEY WITNESSES BEFORE THE GRAND JURY, AND NIXON DID THAT, GRAND JURY, AND NIXON DID THAT, SO HE AND HIS LEGAL TEAM COULD SO HE AND HIS LEGAL TEAM COULD STRATEGIZE AROUND IT. STRATEGIZE AROUND IT. RIGHT NOW THERE ARE CONCERNS RIGHT NOW THERE ARE CONCERNS WHETHER MATT WHITAKER IS PLAYING WHETHER MATT WHITAKER IS PLAYING THAT ROLE FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP. THAT ROLE FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP. IT WAS PROVOCATIVE FOR JAMES IT WAS PROVOCATIVE FOR JAMES BAKER, ENOUGH TO PUBLISH THAT BAKER, ENOUGH TO PUBLISH THAT PIECE, RIGHT AFTER MATT WHITAKER PIECE, RIGHT AFTER MATT WHITAKER WAS NAMED. WAS NAMED. THIS IS BAKER POINTING OUT THAT, THIS IS BAKER POINTING OUT THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN NIXON USED THE YOU KNOW, WHEN NIXON USED THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL AS A JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL AS A BACK CHANNEL OF INFORMATION AND BACK CHANNEL OF INFORMATION AND INTEL THAT TARGETED HIM, THAT INTEL THAT TARGETED HIM, THAT WAS TREATED AS AN IMPEACHABLE WAS TREATED AS AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE FOR THAT PRESIDENT. OFFENSE FOR THAT PRESIDENT. AND THIS IS A VERY LIVE ISSUE. AND THIS IS A VERY LIVE ISSUE. WHETHER MATT WHITAKER RIGHT NOW WHETHER MATT WHITAKER RIGHT NOW IS BACK CHANNELING INFORMATION IS BACK CHANNELING INFORMATION ABOUT THE INVESTIGATION TO ABOUT THE INVESTIGATION TO PRESIDENT TRUMP. PRESIDENT TRUMP. HOW WE’LL FIND OUT ABOUT IT, IF HOW WE’LL FIND OUT ABOUT IT, IF THAT’S HAPPENING, WHO WILL THAT’S HAPPENING, WHO WILL COLLECT EVIDENCE OF THAT, WHO COLLECT EVIDENCE OF THAT, WHO WILL PROSECUTE IT, IF IT IS WILL PROSECUTE IT, IF IT IS PROVEN, WHICH IS MADE ALL THE PROVEN, WHICH IS MADE ALL THE MORE COMPLICATED, ALL THE MORE MORE COMPLICATED, ALL THE MORE URGENT BY THE PROSPECT THAT MATT URGENT BY THE PROSPECT THAT MATT WHITAKER MAY NOT JUST BE WHITAKER MAY NOT JUST BE PROVIDING INTELLIGENCE TO THE PROVIDING INTELLIGENCE TO THE WHITE HOUSE, HE MAY BE WHITE HOUSE, HE MAY BE THROTTLING THE INVESTIGATION THROTTLING THE INVESTIGATION SECRETLY RIGHT NOW FROM INSIDE SECRETLY RIGHT NOW FROM INSIDE THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, AND HOW THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, AND HOW WOULD WE KNOW ABOUT THAT? WOULD WE KNOW ABOUT THAT? ON TOP OF THAT, WITHIN THE LAST ON TOP OF THAT, WITHIN THE LAST 4 4 24 HOURS WE HAVE EVIDENCE THAT 24 HOURS WE HAVE EVIDENCE THAT THE PRESIDENT, THIS IS THE PRESIDENT, THIS IS CONFIRMED, UNCONTESTED, THAT HE CONFIRMED, UNCONTESTED, THAT HE HAS ANOTHER ONGOING SOURCE OF HAS ANOTHER ONGOING SOURCE OF INFORMATION FROM INSIDE THE INFORMATION FROM INSIDE THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION, NAMELY MUELLER INVESTIGATION, NAMELY HIS NORMER CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN, HIS NORMER CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN, PAUL MANAFORT. PAUL MANAFORT. THIS REVELATION THAT HIS FORMER THIS REVELATION THAT HIS FORMER CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN, WHO IS CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN, WHO IS SUPPOSEDLY COOPERATING, HAS BEEN SUPPOSEDLY COOPERATING, HAS BEEN EFFECTIVELY FUNCTIONING AS A SPY EFFECTIVELY FUNCTIONING AS A SPY FOR TRUMP’S DEFENSE. FOR TRUMP’S DEFENSE. INSIDE THE PROSECUTION. INSIDE THE PROSECUTION. THAT IS OBVIOUSLY BLOWING UP THE THAT IS OBVIOUSLY BLOWING UP THE CRIMINAL CASE THAT INVOLVES PAUL CRIMINAL CASE THAT INVOLVES PAUL MANAFORT, BUT IT ALSO MEANS THE MANAFORT, BUT IT ALSO MEANS THE PRESIDENT AND HIS LEGAL TEAM ARE PRESIDENT AND HIS LEGAL TEAM ARE NOW ADMITTING OUT LOUD, IN NOW ADMITTING OUT LOUD, IN PUBLIC, THAT THEY ARE COLLUDING PUBLIC, THAT THEY ARE COLLUDING WITH A CONVICTED FELON TO GAIN WITH A CONVICTED FELON TO GAIN INTELLIGENCE ON THE PROSECUTION, INTELLIGENCE ON THE PROSECUTION, BASICALLY IN ORDER TO DISCREDIT BASICALLY IN ORDER TO DISCREDIT AND OUTMANEUVER THOSE AND OUTMANEUVER THOSE PROSECUTORS WHO ARE PROSECUTORS WHO ARE INVESTIGATING THE PRESIDENT. INVESTIGATING THE PRESIDENT. THEY ARE OPENLY ADMITTING IT. THEY ARE OPENLY ADMITTING IT. WHICH WOULD BE A MASSIVE EXPOSE WHICH WOULD BE A MASSIVE EXPOSE IF IT WERE UNVEILED AS AN IF IT WERE UNVEILED AS AN EXPOSE. EXPOSE. BUT RIGHT NOW IT’S JUST ONE MORE BUT RIGHT NOW IT’S JUST ONE MORE ROCK ON TOP OF THE MOUNTAIN. ROCK ON TOP OF THE MOUNTAIN. IT DOES MEAN FOR ONCE, WE MIGHT IT DOES MEAN FOR ONCE, WE MIGHT BE IN TRULY UNPRECEDENTED LEGAL BE IN TRULY UNPRECEDENTED LEGAL TERRITORY, RIGHT? TERRITORY, RIGHT? I MEAN, NIXON GOT A BACK CHANNEL I MEAN, NIXON GOT A BACK CHANNEL INTO THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, WE INTO THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, WE KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT NIXON DID. NIXON DID. NIXON DIDN’T USE A CONVICTED NIXON DIDN’T USE A CONVICTED FELON IN THE MIDDLE OF HIS FELON IN THE MIDDLE OF HIS CRIMINAL CASE, THAT’S HIS BACK CRIMINAL CASE, THAT’S HIS BACK CHANNEL. CHANNEL. WE HAVE NOW, BETWEEN WHAT WE WE HAVE NOW, BETWEEN WHAT WE LEARNED IN THE ’70s ABOUT NIXON, LEARNED IN THE ’70s ABOUT NIXON, WE HAVE ALL THE EVIDENCE ABOUT WE HAVE ALL THE EVIDENCE ABOUT WHAT NIXON DID AND IT’S WHAT NIXON DID AND IT’S STAGGERING. STAGGERING. BUT EVEN NIXON NEVER DID BUT EVEN NIXON NEVER DID ANYTHING LIKE THIS. ANYTHING LIKE THIS. AND SO IF THIS IS ALL HAPPENING AND SO IF THIS IS ALL HAPPENING IN PLAIN SIGHT RIGHT NOW, HOW IN PLAIN SIGHT RIGHT NOW, HOW DOES IT GET FIXED? DOES IT GET FIXED? AND BY WHOM? AND BY WHOM? AND WHAT ARE THE BIGGEST RISKS
