Heres how it came to be. In may of this year, may 22nd, the New York Times had a scoop that they probably only got because they are specifically the New York Times. They sent crack reporters to an otherwise sleepy courthouse in albany, new york, not a Federal Courthouse, a state court, because that day in that state court in new york, a longtime Business Partner of Michael Cohens, A Taxicab Mogul Named Gene Friedman Who everybody called the taxi king, he was in court. He had been facing really serious charges in new york, Tax Evasion Charges in new york more than 5 million and four criminal counts of tax fraud and facing a charge of grand larceny. A big stack of charges involving a large amount of money and potentially a large amount of jail time. The story they uncovered at the courthouse that day, for some reason, friedman had gotten this huge Criminal Liability he was facing winnowed down to almost
nothing. He was able to work out some sort of deal where all of that prison time and
Rachel Maddow takes a look at the days top political news stories. But the president s own fate is a real front burner issue now because of what just happened with cohen and manafort. Lets start with manafort. On manafort, you know by now the basics. Manafort was convicted on eight Felony Counts. The jury in the Manafort Case was not able to reach a verdict on the other ten Felony Counts that manafort was facing. They didnt find him not guilty on those other ten charges. They just couldnt come to a decision. That gives the prosecution and the defense both some options here. On the counts where the jury didnt reach a verdict, there was a mistrial for those ten counts, than means prosecutors could decide to try Paul Manafort again on those ten counts. Prosecutors have a choice as to whether or not they want to do that. On the other hand, there are the eight counts, the eight Felony Charges where the jurors did reach a verdict. On all eight charges they found him guilty. On those eight gu
Detailed text transcripts for TV channel - MSNBC - 20190721:00:49:15 archive.org - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from archive.org Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
what s the most significant new information you saw? there isn t substantial new information. what it really is is confirmation of what we low pressure know, that donald trump was personally intimately involved in efforts to pay stormy daniels in order to silence her, a story about them having an affair while the first lady was reportedly pregnant and that donald trump directed michael cohen to make that payment, the payment that was a crime. we knew this, because we saw prosecutors in southern district of norv stand up and allow michael cohen to say as much. while the president wasn t indicted for a conspiracy charge, essential this evidence confirms that the position is function all an unindict not some fringe sure, but a core part of at the same time attempting to defraud the american people. are you surprised no one et walls charged?
and the ferguson police department. issue aed a long, narrative report without indicting anybody. the key there is how high the level of public interest is. here i think the public interest and importance is as high or higher. other thing to keep in mind, we actually do name other unindict people all the time. people always do this. list the people charged and other people for whatever reason you haven t charged you anonymize the name, call them co-conspiracy one, et cetera. obvious who it is especially if it s the president. the policy sounds good on one level but isn t really observed. finally, we have to avoid a catch 22. doj s policy is we don t indict the president and our policy also is we don t say anything bad about anyone who s not indicted. what, if anything can ever be said? that s the glitch in the system. we don t know how mueller or barr will handle that situation and waiting to see.