sentence than what we were expecting? well, it s theoretically possible, but, remember, he really starts behind the eight ball. flash back a little bit. he pleaded guilty last summer without entering into a cooperation agreement with the southern district. these were on the tax fraud charges and on the hush money charges. pleaded guilty with no cooperation agreement, but he said he would cooperate voluntarily in any event. then in december it was revealed he also had been offering evidence to mueller. at that point he pleaded guilty to separate charges in front of the special counsel s office related to lying to congress. now each of those, the southern district and mueller, then filed sentencing memos. mueller said, yeah, it was fine, he gave fine evidence. he got sentenced two months there. the southern district wrote a scatheth sentencing memo saying not only were his criming
public. michael cohen was not employed by the cia, the nsa, the military. he hasn t spent a lot of time in classified environments. so i don t imagine there will be material he can t speak out in open session that he could in front of the intelligence committees. what is really remarkable now, i think we re up to three different committees in which he will be testifying, and i ve got at least two questions. number one is does he have evidence of criminal wrongdoing that for whatever reason wasn t pursued by the special counsel? and number two, this i think is going to be primarily a political event. all we know about what michael cohen told the special counsel is what the special counsel has told various courts in sentencing memos and that sort of thing. michael cohen is going to tell stories. and we know this president s behavior in public is behavior that we would not tolerate in our teenage children.
could be very heavily redacted. they have until midnight to file that. so we will be here waiting for that. it s another friday with news that we re expecting from robert mueller. who knows where this could go next. that s for sure. julia, i hope you re getting takeout for lunch and dinner. thank you to jewulia and geoff. let me bring in jim walden, kimberly atkins, and jeff mason. jill, let me start with you. there is the potential for robert mueller to reveal kind of a lot in this sentencing memo. do you think he will? i think he has in the past given us a lot of clues in indictments and in sentencing memos. so there s no reason to suspect that he won t. i just don t know that this is his last word on any of this. and i m not one of those who believes that for sure there s
so i don t imagine there will be material he can t speak out in open session that he could in front of the intelligence committees. what is really remarkable now, i think we re up to three different committees in which he will be testifying, and i ve got at least two questions. number one is does he have evidence of criminal wrongdoing that for whatever reason wasn t pursued by the special counsel? and number two, this i think is going to be primarily a political event. all we know about what michael cohen told the special counsel is what the special counsel has told various courts in sentencing memos and that sort of thing. michael cohen is going to tell stories. and we know this president s behavior in public is behavior that we would not tolerate in our teenage children. can you imagine the stories that michael cohen has to tell about the president s behavior in private? i have to assume the white house is very nervous not so much about the legal implications here but by the politic
russian campaign text exchanges, excerpts from e-mails, et cetera how does it change the narrative, this indictment i think it makes the narrative rip and grounds it in a fact pattern which mueller has done every step of the way you saw it in the sentencing memos. he s presenting these new narratives each time that lay out a lot of things that some of the stuff has been in the public record some of it hadn t. there s rich detail that shows that the trump campaign wasn t just occasionally bumping up against russian interests. they were actively soliciting information from the russians in order to undermine hillary clint clinton s campaign the russian s interest was sabotaging the 2016 campaign i think this indictment really lays out how stone was a bridge. for whatever bravado roger wants to say, this is a pretty airtight indictment. all of the facts are there one of the things i think is missing from the indictment that is interesting is they didn t