when they come to the extra step that mueller referred to about putting it under seal, with really no more reasoning they just lump it in there too. as olc memos go i think it s pretty mucky and policy driven. i think the weight of scholarly opinion is that it per se is not that the bottom line might be right, might not. but the memo itself is pretty thread bare. carol lamb and hair harley. joining me max even waters of california. chair of the house financials service committee. your view congresswoman within this matter, which is to say evidence the president has committed crimes or at least sufficient evidence for an indictment were he not the president, but he is the preponderate so no indictment. and now we just sort of wait, i guess. well, as i have said for a long time, inju think that this
michael cohen sentencing memo, the government s writing and alkugs before the judge then candidate druch direct add criminal conspiracy that results in the person he paid to do the crimes pleading to a felony and doing jail time. donald trump paid michael cohen to do a criminal. michael cohen is now in jail for said crime. donald trump is the president in the white house. so that s the country we now live in apparently thanks to a legal memo written in 1973 that basically says if you are the president they let you do it. joining me for more on the possible legal questions surrounding the president carolyn lamb form u.s. forefor the southern district of california. and the executive producer of the talking feds podcast. let s start with the counterfactual here, carol. if donald trump is just donald trump, the ceo of trump organize or let s say he lost the election after the same set of facts and now a private citizen,
because i ve read them and they re actually persuasive i think. it s a thorny issue process opinion and the constitution does have a specific enumerated way to deal with high crimes and misdemeanors by the president of the united states, which is impeachment. and it s unclear what the constitution feels about diet indicting the president. though it doesn t bar it in the text. what do you think? ? the correct operating legal procedure, carol. you know, actually, it is. and you know, the unsealed fbi search warrant affidavit was a little bit of a gift to us that the judge said, no you re going to release that and the american public deserves to see what the details were here with respect to those phone calls that were made by michael cohen and the president s involvement and such. that was a little bit of gift. but we are back now in criminal prosecution federal prosecutionland where very little is said short of of an indictment. and there are no more indictments coming.
actually seems far clearer. i mean, check this out. according to michael cohen s sentencing memo, that s the government s writing and his allocution before the judge, then donald trump directed a criminal conspiracy that results in the person that he paid to do the crimes pleading to a felony, doing jail time. donald trump paid michael cohen to do a crime. michael cohen is now in jail for said crime. donald trump is the president in the white house. so that s the country weapon now live in, apparently, thanks to a legal memo written in 1973 that basically says that if you re the president, they let you do it. joining me now for more on the possible legal questions surrounding the question are carol lamb, former u.s. attorney for the southern district of california, and harry litman, former u.s. attorney for the western district of pennsylvania, also the creator and executive producer of the talking feds podcast. carol, if donald trump is just donald trump, the ceo of trump org, or le
things. first, it s hardly a roll of the dice. i agree with carol. but you re coming up 7s on the obstruction, which if you that s the main reason for reading the mueller report carefully is it details at least four instances where the proof of culpable intent is clear. and then here, as you say, chris, in many ways it s simpler. cohen has already pleaded guilty to these crimes. anyone who conspired with him would absolutely be guilty. now maybe they never considered charging trump, but individual 1 was already up to the line. and what we ve learned in the last couple of days makes it worse for him, for hope hicks, and for others. and the real rub here is we re not sure exactly why it was closed down. the normal presumption of regularity is hard to adhere to under current regime and doj. so we ve got the 1973 memo, which is fairly long and in depth. also a 99 memo. 99-2000.