is not the truth. is that just misspeaking or part of a campaign of deception? it s time to go deep. let s get after it. in an on the record interview with reuters, the president says that he could run the probe himself if he wanted. all this coming after his biggest tweet storm yet about mueller and word that his white house counsel cooperated with mueller s probe more than trump might have known. here to discuss that and much more, former attorney general michael mukasey. judge, good to have you as always. good to be with you. so if you were to hear that the president has decided, i m taking over this probe. i m taking it over. what would your reaction be? i would shake myself and wake up. just a dream? yeah. can he, or should he not? i i have no idea whether he can. i can t believe that he can. he d have to fire mueller in the
Anderson Cooper takes viewers beyond the headlines with in-depth reporting and investigations.
making a false statement to an fbi agent.
Anderson Cooper takes viewers beyond the headlines with in-depth reporting and investigations.
he said that initially. they later reversed themselves and flynn was indicted for making a false statement to an fbi agent. but as point of fact, judge, he s told them things that were not true and things that he should have known and recollected in realtime. right. maybe he did. and maybe he did it because he thought there was some impropriety about having the conversation with kislyak. that s why sally yates, then at the a.g. s office, then went to don mcgahn and said you better figure out what s going on with this. i don t think there was any impropriety in that conversation at all. in fact i think flynn would have been committing malpractice if he had not had the conversation with kislyak. he is the guy who was going to be the national security then why did he lie about it? beats me. that s a good question, no? it s an excellent question, but i don t know the extent t
For people to say this is just political. this is donald trump dealing with paying off mistresses, however you want to see it. take a step back and look at the whole thing from the god s eye view, that one piece of data tells me and people in the intelligence community that russian was conducting an intelligence shaping operation to craft, hone, and groom a potential candidate for the president of the united states through bribery to become a national leader and to facilitate him to become president of the united states. anywhere else, any other person would have been arrested at this point because russia was this is not just happening at one point. there were multiple russian contacts. obviously put out by russian intelligence, the kremlin itself, the foreign ministry, the general prosecutor who all appeared to have a task of shaping donald trump s candidacy
And only one or the other. and. you still have to prove it though, ken. you are correct. you are correct that there is an objective truth. something happened, and the american people as a general matter would like to know what those things are when it relates to their government. we don t get the god s eye view of who is telling the truth. well, that s not always true. that s not always true. sometimes it s yard, which by the way is a damn high standard. but, bakari, sometimes you will say one thing. i say another. one of us is right and one of us is wrong. yeah, i don t understand where all of a sudden we don t know the definition of truth anymore. i think that ken is not quite portraying what this investigation actually is, and i think rudy giuliani, although he s really shown himself to be inartful and a poorly disciplined attorney who has no idea what the facts of his client s case are, what we re seeing right now is that this
Certainly trump s lawyers have taken and will continue. and i think bakari alluded to it. if i were on the trump legal team, i d be advising him not to sit down with mueller for both of the reasons you started out with, chris. again, they re not exclusive of each other. and rudy giuliani very inartfully talked about who do you believe? in his example, is it comey s truth, or it trump s truth? and it s only one or the other. and you still have to prove it though, ken. you are correct. you are correct that there is an objective truth. something happened, and the american people as a general matter would like to know what those things are when it relates to their government. but let s not forget the people decide who s telling the truth. we don t get the god s eye view of who is telling the truth. well, that s not always true. that s not always true.