Special prosecutor is going to talk to steve bannon, who you spent a lot of time talking to. The Special Prosecutor has been talking to many of your sources in this book. Has the Special Prosecutor reached out to you to talk to you about either the firing of the Special Prosecutor or any other elements of this story . He has not. And if the Special Prosecutor does want to interview you, would you cooperate with that . Good question, and i dont know the answer. But i think that the answer is, yes, because i have nothing to hide. Everything i know is in the book. What about the sources that are many sources are revealed in the book and many quotes attributed to people. But there are a lot of unattributed quotes. If the Special Prosecutor would point to the book and say who is the source here, and its a source i cant reveal, i clearly would not. You know theres no privilege. The Special Prosecutor could hold you in contempt and you could end up in jail by refusing
to answer that. Ive had
I am grateful you came on. and i guess let s do it again in four years. thanks so much. see ya. so wolff s book is one example of this broade er phenomenon that you ve been hearing about, this bevy of trump books that says now these sources are coming forward to tell us what happened. six months after donald trump vacated the white house, now sources tell us general mark milley was concerned trump might attempt a coup. now they tell us milley compared trump s lies to adolf hitler s rhetoric. these shockers are showing up in the new books and it s begging the question why now? i ve heard from a lot of you over email saying why are these stories only coming out now? why weren t these sources leaking to reporters in realtime? and if they were, why didn t the reporters tell us what s going on here? let s dig into that part of the story with susan glasser. she is working on one of her own with her husband, peter baker, and she shared some of the
It is like the old mike tyson thing. he would win the fight before he got in the ring because people were scared of him. this goes to the institutionalist aspect of the mueller investigation. he was more concerned with his own institution. his open part of the store than the rest the house burning down. which you say is someone who cares a lot about the underlying allegations. the issues with donald trump. people matter and say i heard so many good things about moou. there are many good things. particularly his nonpartisanship and integrity. sometimes when investigations end, we learn more stuff. is what was going on inside if they were concerned about this stuff. i want to do pardons as well. the team considered the idea that trump could just pardon everybody. flynn, family members. and this was their conclusion. according to wolff, this is quoting what he said was mueller s office, the president can pardon his family members or
That s not the case. they have disputed other things. if that s what the mueller folks thought, does that explain why mueller held back for the interview? well, it says something worse. it says his report is a lie in the sense that he is publicly said we never considered indicting. here s an interesting thing. march 2018, they have this 56-page memo. it is june when we have this unsolicited opinion by barr that goes to rosenstein and to the white house counsel saying that you can prosecute obstruction which were the object crimes in the memo. so wolff has been playing in on some of this. let s take a look. the conclusion is yes, the president could fire robert mueller. what happens to the work product? they ask if they are fired.
Close associates even for the purpose of impeding investigations. your view. i don t believe you can. i believe they thought they were executives and they had nixon corollary. if the president said it is the law, so it is because the president said it. i think the people around him, the justice department, both rosenstein and barr, they all believe that. the fact is, it is an old statement and the darrel of justice had this ruling. you can t be a judge in your own matter. so you can t give yourself a pardon. you can t give your family members a pardon. you can t do any of these things. if that were test in the court, that would be found to be a failure. let me ask you the toughest question. this is the one i m really wondering. if wolff is on the right track. if these quotes are substantially in the ballpark of what was being internally discussed, why would this be coming out?