Live Breaking News & Updates on Conspiracy Question|Page 4
Stay updated with breaking news from Conspiracy question. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
Conspiracy question, they don t have the substantive nugget in there. that is probably why there is no conspiracy charge. they have plenty on stone with his blatant lying and witness tampering. i think that is really important here because so much of the indictments has been about false statements and covering up. obviously, common sense asks why are they so concerned about this? was stone just trying to walk it back or does he have something more substantive that he is trying to cover up here? we see the way that the president and giuliani are trying to witness tamper with michael cohen. the president has been trying to encourage stone to stay strong. this is all part of the same type of behavior and obviously raises the question of what is it that they don t want people to talk about. let me just read you from the indictment. this is part of point five. it reads stone was contacted by a senior trump campaign official ....
Confirmed. there are some specific things they have to share with congress like if there was a disagreement about who to prosecute or some other major decision. there is not really a lot that says this has to be made public or has to be shared. the reason are looking at the executive privilege thing is we know they won t bring charges against the president. they are operating under justice department guidelines. when you look at the question of obstruction, the white house wants to shield the american public from learning details about the possibility that the president may have tried to obstruct justice. one way is to say the conversations are covered by executive privilege. they should never be made public. there is reason for them to worry. the story our colleagues evan perez and pam brown put out, they say muller s team is looking at the president s public statements as an indication he could have lied along the way. or tried to influence witnesses. that s the obstruction questio ....
Of the special counsel s office. does the special counsel make a statement like that in court if that line of inquiry, the russia conspiracy question, is closed and if michael cohen s contribution was in any way minimal? or should we take that statement at face value? i think we should take it at face value. they re continue to work on this. michael cohen provided them significant information they found very useful. remember, in michael cohen s sentencing it was the special counsel s office that was giving him the cooperation he wanted to get a lower sentence from. sdny said he didn t help that office very much. it was the special counsel s office he needed to get the good letter from, and they gave it to him. they said he was very helpful in the core issues that are the mueller team s mandate to investigation, which is the russian interference and the obstruction. so that, to me, is another danger sign for the president because we don t know what he said. you know, it was very inter ....
Say, mr. president, do not do this do not go for them and do this investigation to testify or whatever. because, the president did a 90 some odd minute rally, off the cut, 90 minutes straight. these questions, it s not going to be a one hour, two hour, it s going to be a very long conversation. i think that are right. what they re doing to do is say, let him talk. open up these broad questions. what i try to do in my life i don t try to ask a question that i don t know the answer. i think mueller and his team know the answers to the questions. it s about the follow-up questions that they haven t released which could be dangerous for the president. allen, the president has the executive privilege, we agree on that. can t he waive that privilege, for example in the firing of jim comey when he go on television, ....
Us that the investigation still relates to there are serious questions about obstruction, about, you know, the firing of mr. comey and the firing of mr. flynn, questions about jeff sessions and so it really and also questions about the collusion aspect and, you know, really that s a conspiracy question, but there are questions related to that. so it s a very broad and far-reaching. there s really nothing that s off the table i think in these questions. it s interesting, general hayden. if i m doing an interview and i have 40 questions i want to ask somebody written down, that s that s a two-hour interview just on the face of it. yes. and if there s not other follow-up questions, and it seems like the consensus is that these are just broad topics with follow-up questions. if all these questions and others in these topics were asked, this is a lengthy interview. oh, my god, yes. and the follow-on questions and keep in mind that director mueller probably thinks he knows th ....