want to use that has to concern the president. and if he s saying who did direct them to do this? tid i maybe? thank you both. harry, let me start with you on was trekted, had strikes me as the most flashing neon sign and most legal significance for the president. after july 22nd, 2016, a senior trump campaign official was dreked, amazing use of the passive voice and what other damaging information they had regarding the clinton campaign. what do you think of that? instantly famous use of the passive voice.
course for this kind of charge and case. when michael cohen was arrested and everyone kept saying i ll take a bullet for the president, i was one of the people who said yeah, i don t think so. he s going to cooperate. albeit not totally fully but he s cooperating. i do not think that of roger stone. i do not think this man is capable of becoming a trustworthy cooperator, even if he tried. i can t madge an prosecutor ever embracing him. i think that s probably right. thank toz you both. your reaction, senator to the indictment for lying to congress and if i m not mistaken, lying to your committee or i guess the house committee of roger stone. here s where we are and i don t think it s just the lies
firm, he s going to be pardoned. if president pardons stone or anybody else, they re going to have to testify before congress and court. they lose their fifth amendment protections. which is why he dangles pardons for so long doesn t actually give them. the latest developments seem to have taken the president and isth country into new development. the fallout from this head-spinning day next you re made of trillions of cells.
many have pled guilty. this is a very, very precarious situation for the president. let s assume the best faith here, good faith look, it s been two years of mueller. sure, you ve got all these indictments. yes, you re surrounded by crooks of various types but you ve got a lot of lying. you ve got a lot of evidence of shady financial dealings you don t have collusion yet what s the deal? i think that actually cuts the other way, and i d say two things number one, i m not sure if any other president, including nixon, have surrounded themselves with so many criminals. the second is there s so much lying going on even when they plead guilty like manafort, they still lie the question is why? why is there so much continued lying? and it s always about russia it always comes back to that central thing. so to me, the fact that it s taken two years, which by the way is actually a short amount of time for an independent counsel or special counsel
what are your big take aways? that the president s whole argument about the russia story, from the beginning has been that his campaign and he had nothing tootoo with russia. and the special counsel was appointed to investigate, among other things, russian intervention in the 2016 election and coordination between that activity and anyone associate would the trump campaign. this is not quite a collusion indictment. but it is very much a coordination indictment. because what roger stone is accused of doing here is lying about his coordination between wikileaks and the trump campaign. a lot of the facts were publicly known and had been publicly reported by media. but it s different when the