in the cohen sentencing documents. talk about the significance of today s development. well, in case we wineeded mo dramia attached to this, we have a federal judge saying this is of national importance. let s look at specifically what he s talking about. the probable cause that went into the affidavit and search of cohen s home and offices. what does that mean? when you write that affidavit you re convincing a judge that location or those multiple locations are likely to contain evidence of the crime that you re investigating. so what can we find out when this material is released. we know there will be some redactions. usually that involves sources and methods. what i will be focusing in like a laser is the evidence of who, what, where, when and why. who was it directing these violations, directing hush money payments? how much did the president know and when? and really what are the origins of any money pa that came out of
just because something is inevitable or even predicted, we ve long known, for example, that things were headed towards some sort of a confrontation between jim mattis the defense secretary and president trump that still manages to be shocking and surprising in the way it played out, and i do think when you see the president backed into a corner, he has escalated his behavior already in a way that does make me quite anxious when i think about what kinds of dysfunction we might see playing out in 2019. you know what, david, susan brings up a good point. i think the cohen sentencing was the end of last week, right, and then there was some fallout the beginning of this week. and the flynn thing was the beginning of this week. she s right because even by the standards of the trump presidency, this week has been bonkers. and i sense that more and more people are getting fed up with it. do you agree with that? you didn t even mention, don, the market melt down that was going on in respons
way it played out, and i do think when you see the president backed into a corner, he has escalated his behavior already in a way that does make me quite anxious when i think about what kinds of dysfunction we might see playing out in 2019. you know what, david, susan brings up a good point. i think the cohen sentencing was the end of last week, right, and then there was some fallout the beginning of this week. and the flynn thing was the beginning of this week. she s right because even by the standards of the trump presidency, this week has been bonkers. and i sense that more and more people are getting fed up with it. do you agree with that? you didn t even mention, don, the market melt down that was going on in response to this, which is one of the ways i think
flynn s lawyers who had taken the position in their sentencing memo last week hat flynn had ln tricked into lying to the fbi. the judge forcing flynn to respond to pointed questions about whether he lied to the fbi, and whether he d known at the time that it was wrong to do so. flynn s lawyer s introduction of what amounted to a conspiracy theory backfired spectacularly, but it likely cheered the president who tweeted this this morning. good luck today in court to general michael flynn. will be interesting to see what he has to say. despite tremendous pressure being put on him about russian collusion in our great and obviously highly successful political campaign. there was no collusion. we re awaiting a presidential response to today s fireworks and flynn s refusal to go along with the jeanine pirro-approved conspiracy theory about the fbi. for now, flynn will continue to cooperate with all ongoing federal investigations while he awaits sentencing in 90 days. here to take b us throu
trouble. do you understand? flynn says your your honor. sullivan says do you wish to challenge the circumstantial c under which you were interviewed by the fbi? no, your honor. joyce, explain to us. i m going to be a nerdy lawyer for a minute. please. and talk about sentencing and what lawyers do at sentencing. it was clear to everyone walking in, although the judge was smart to put flynn under oath and get him to say it under oath, that flynn was not claiming that the fbi had entrapped him. if that had been the case, flynn would have never pled guilty, his lawyers would not have permitted him to plead guilty and the judge wouldn t have accepted the plea. instead, the lawyers tried a sentencing strategy and it misfired really badly, but what they wanted to do was capitalize on federal rules of sentencing, which require judges to consider a series of articulated factors in the law, and one of those is to sentence similarly situated defendants similarly to compare this defen