‘It's Time For President Donald Trump To Throw Rudy From The Train’ | All In | MSNBC

SINGLE QUESTION FROM A REPORTER ABOUT WHAT HE WAS DOING AROUND ABOUT WHAT HE WAS DOING AROUND THAT CALL AND MENTIONED IN THAT THAT CALL AND MENTIONED IN THAT CALL CALL

SO WHY IS HE MENTIONED THERE? SO WHY IS HE MENTIONED THERE? JOINING ME NOW WHAT IS HAPPENING JOINING ME NOW WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE HARRY LITMAN, AND FORMER DEPUTY HARRY LITMAN, AND FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL IN ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL IN THE CLINTON DEPARTMENT OF THE CLINTON DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND MIMI ROCAH, NOW AN JUSTICE AND MIMI ROCAH, NOW AN MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST HARRY, AS SOMEONE WHO WAS AT THE HARRY, AS SOMEONE WHO WAS AT THE DOJ WHO I TALKED TO A LOT ABOUT DOJ WHO I TALKED TO A LOT ABOUT WILLIAM BARR AND THE ROLE HE HAS WILLIAM BARR AND THE ROLE HE HAS HERE, IT SEEMS TO ME THERE ARE HERE, IT SEEMS TO ME THERE ARE REALLY BASIC QUESTIONS WILLIAM REALLY BASIC QUESTIONS WILLIAM BARR NEEDS TO ANSWER ONE WAY OR BARR NEEDS TO ANSWER ONE WAY OR ANOTHER THROUGH HIS OWN MOUTH IN ANOTHER THROUGH HIS OWN MOUTH IN FRONT OF REPORTERS ABOUT WHAT FRONT OF REPORTERS ABOUT WHAT ROLE HE PLAYED OR DID NOT PLAY ROLE HE PLAYED OR DID NOT PLAY IN THIS WHOLE THING IN THIS WHOLE THING >> I THINK HE WON’T UNLESS HE’S >> I THINK HE WON’T UNLESS HE’S REALLY DRAGGED IN

REALLY DRAGGED IN YOU’RE RIGHT, THIS WOULD BE YOU’RE RIGHT, THIS WOULD BE FLAGRANTLY IMPROPER FOR HIM TO FLAGRANTLY IMPROPER FOR HIM TO HAVE GOTTEN INVOLVED EVEN HAVE GOTTEN INVOLVED EVEN WITHOUT IT BEING A NEFARIOUS WITHOUT IT BEING A NEFARIOUS CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY JUST FOR HIM TO BE IN THIS KIND JUST FOR HIM TO BE IN THIS KIND OF FOREIGN POLICY LED BY RUDY OF FOREIGN POLICY LED BY RUDY GIULIANI GIULIANI

BUT WE KNOW THAT HE REALLY AS BUT WE KNOW THAT HE REALLY AS YOU SAY HAS BEEN WILLING TO PUSH YOU SAY HAS BEEN WILLING TO PUSH THE ENVELOPE, SHRED THE ENVELOPE THE ENVELOPE, SHRED THE ENVELOPE IN TERMS OF WHAT HE DID WITH THE IN TERMS OF WHAT HE DID WITH THE MUELLER REPORT MUELLER REPORT SO IS THIS JUST A BRIDGE TOO FAR SO IS THIS JUST A BRIDGE TOO FAR FOR HIM? FOR HIM? IT SEEMED TO ME INTERESTINGLY, IT SEEMED TO ME INTERESTINGLY, CHRIS, THAT TRUMP DIDN’T HAVE CHRIS, THAT TRUMP DIDN’T HAVE QUITE THE SAME TONE HE HAD WITH QUITE THE SAME TONE HE HAD WITH SESSIONS WHERE HE WAS REALLY SESSIONS WHERE HE WAS REALLY BITTER BITTER AND TRUMP IS THE GUY THAT SPLOW AND TRUMP IS THE GUY THAT SPLOW REVEALED BARR WOULDN’T DO THIS

REVEALED BARR WOULDN’T DO THIS SOMETHING IS A LITTLE BIT ODD SOMETHING IS A LITTLE BIT ODD AND DOESN’T QUITE ADD UP TO IT AND DOESN’T QUITE ADD UP TO IT BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, BARR BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, BARR KNOWS THAT IT WOULD BE PERSONAL KNOWS THAT IT WOULD BE PERSONAL SUICIDE OR PERILOUS FOR HIM TO SUICIDE OR PERILOUS FOR HIM TO BE DRAGGED INTO THE IMPEACHMENT BE DRAGGED INTO THE IMPEACHMENT NOW NOW THERE’S NO ENDS TO THAT ROAD THERE’S NO ENDS TO THAT ROAD

>> IT’S VERY CLEAR THE >> IT’S VERY CLEAR THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WANTS DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WANTS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT NOTHING TO DO WITH IT THEY’VE PUT OUT STATEMENTS, THEY’VE PUT OUT STATEMENTS, THEY’VE DISTANCED THELSELVES THEY’VE DISTANCED THELSELVES FROM SOME THINGS FROM SOME THINGS I GUESS THE QUESTION IS IS IT I GUESS THE QUESTION IS IS IT PLAUSIBLE OR TENABLE FOR BARR TO PLAUSIBLE OR TENABLE FOR BARR TO MAINTAIN SILENCE AND PUT OUT MAINTAIN SILENCE AND PUT OUT STATEMENTS DISTANCING HIMSELF STATEMENTS DISTANCING HIMSELF WITHOUT SOME FULL ACCOUNTING WITHOUT SOME FULL ACCOUNTING FROM DOJ? FROM DOJ? >> IT SHOULDN’T BE? >> IT SHOULDN’T BE? THIS A CRAZY ACTUALLY

THIS A CRAZY ACTUALLY WHAT YOU JUST LAID OUT, THERE WHAT YOU JUST LAID OUT, THERE WERE FIVE QUESTION, DID BILL WERE FIVE QUESTION, DID BILL BARR TALK TO THE PRESIDENT? BARR TALK TO THE PRESIDENT? BEFORE THAT PHONE CALL DID HE BEFORE THAT PHONE CALL DID HE KNOW TRUMP WAS USING HIS NAME? KNOW TRUMP WAS USING HIS NAME? DID HE HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH DID HE HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH UKRAINE? UKRAINE? THOSE ARE QUESTIONS PEOPLE THOSE ARE QUESTIONS PEOPLE SHOULD BE INVESTIGATE WHAT SHOULD BE INVESTIGATE WHAT HAPPENED WITH UKRAINE, WHETHER HAPPENED WITH UKRAINE, WHETHER IT BE PEOPLE IN CONGRESS, THE IT BE PEOPLE IN CONGRESS, THE IMPEACHMENT COMMITTEE OR THE IMPEACHMENT COMMITTEE OR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ASSUMING WHICH I THINK WE ALL ASSUMING WHICH I THINK WE ALL RIGHTLY ASSUME THAT GIULIANI’S RIGHTLY ASSUME THAT GIULIANI’S INVESTIGATION THERE TIES INTO INVESTIGATION THERE TIES INTO THIS THIS SO BARR IS A WITNESS AND NOT A SO BARR IS A WITNESS AND NOT A PERIPHERAL WITNESS PERIPHERAL WITNESS

HE IS SOMEONE THAT NEEDS TO BE HE IS SOMEONE THAT NEEDS TO BE ASKED QUESTIONS AND GIVE ASKED QUESTIONS AND GIVE TRUTHFUL ANSWERS, PROBING TRUTHFUL ANSWERS, PROBING QUESTIONS QUESTIONS >> I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR >> I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR IT’S ENTIRELY POSSIBLE AS A IT’S ENTIRELY POSSIBLE AS A STORY HERE THE PRESIDENT DID STORY HERE THE PRESIDENT DID JUST THROW THIS OUT AND DIDN’T JUST THROW THIS OUT AND DIDN’T CHECK WITH BAR, BARR HAD NOTHING CHECK WITH BAR, BARR HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT

TO DO WITH IT I’D JUST LIKE TO KNOW ONE WAY OR I’D JUST LIKE TO KNOW ONE WAY OR ANOTHER AS A FACTUAL MATTER ANOTHER AS A FACTUAL MATTER THE OTHER THING HERE IS ABOUT THE OTHER THING HERE IS ABOUT THE ROLE — I MEAN GIULIANI IN THE ROLE — I MEAN GIULIANI IN THE GEORGE KENT TESTIMONY WE’RE THE GEORGE KENT TESTIMONY WE’RE GOING TO GET INTO THAT THAT A GOING TO GET INTO THAT THAT A LITTLE BIT, BUT THERE’S ONE LITTLE BIT, BUT THERE’S ONE THEME HERE IN THE TESTIMONY THEME HERE IN THE TESTIMONY

THERE WAS AN EXTENSIVE ATTEMPT THERE WAS AN EXTENSIVE ATTEMPT TO EXTORT UKRAINE, IT ALMOST TO EXTORT UKRAINE, IT ALMOST WORKED AND GIULIANI WAS RUNNING WORKED AND GIULIANI WAS RUNNING POINT ON IT WITH THE PRESIDENT POINT ON IT WITH THE PRESIDENT GIULIANI WAS SAYING THIS GIULIANI WAS SAYING THIS YESTERDAY, I’VE BEEN THINKING YESTERDAY, I’VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT WHAT THIS MEANS ALL DAY ABOUT WHAT THIS MEANS ALL DAY I WANT TO GET BOTH YOUR FEED I WANT TO GET BOTH YOUR FEED BOOK

BOOK THE INVESTIGATION I CONDUCTED THE INVESTIGATION I CONDUCTED CONCERNING 2016 UKRAINIAN CONCERNING 2016 UKRAINIAN COLLUSION AND CORRUPTION WAS COLLUSION AND CORRUPTION WAS DONE SOLELY AS A DEFENSE DONE SOLELY AS A DEFENSE ATTORNEY TO DEFEND MY CLIENT ATTORNEY TO DEFEND MY CLIENT AGAINST FALSE CHAJS THAT KEPT AGAINST FALSE CHAJS THAT KEPT CHANGING ONE AFTER ANOTHER CHANGING ONE AFTER ANOTHER WHAT DOES THAT MEAN AND WHAT WHAT DOES THAT MEAN AND WHAT DOES THAT MEAN IN A LEGAL OR DOES THAT MEAN IN A LEGAL OR CONSTITUTIONAL SENSE AS WE ENTER CONSTITUTIONAL SENSE AS WE ENTER IMPEACHMENT? IMPEACHMENT? >> TALK ABOUT CHANGING >> TALK ABOUT CHANGING EXPLANATIONS, IT’S GIULIANI’S EXPLANATIONS, IT’S GIULIANI’S BEFORE HE WAS ROOTING OUT BEFORE HE WAS ROOTING OUT CORRUPTION IN FAVOR OF HIM CORRUPTION IN FAVOR OF HIM

WHAT HE’S TRYING TO DO THERE IS WHAT HE’S TRYING TO DO THERE IS MAKE A PLAY FOR PRIVILEGE, BUT I MAKE A PLAY FOR PRIVILEGE, BUT I THINK IT WON’T WORK THINK IT WON’T WORK AND BOY IS HE TAILOR MADE TO BE AND BOY IS HE TAILOR MADE TO BE THE VILLAIN HERE THE VILLAIN HERE THE FACT HE’S THERE MAKES IT SO THE FACT HE’S THERE MAKES IT SO CLEAR THAT OF COURSE HE’S ACTING CLEAR THAT OF COURSE HE’S ACTING FOR TRUMP’S PERSONAL INTEREST FOR TRUMP’S PERSONAL INTEREST AND NOT FOR ANY BROADER AND NOT FOR ANY BROADER ANTI-CORRUPTION IN UKRAINE

ANTI-CORRUPTION IN UKRAINE SO HE’S FRONT AND CENTER SO HE’S FRONT AND CENTER AND THEY’VE GOT THE PINCER ON AND THEY’VE GOT THE PINCER ON HIM IN A WAY THEY DON’T WITH HIM IN A WAY THEY DON’T WITH OTHER WITNESSES OTHER WITNESSES

BECAUSE AS MIMISAYS SDNY IS BECAUSE AS MIMISAYS SDNY IS CLEARLY MAKING HIM A SUBJECT, CLEARLY MAKING HIM A SUBJECT, AND NOW CONGRESS IS AS WELL AND NOW CONGRESS IS AS WELL AND HE IS REALLY FIT TO — I AND HE IS REALLY FIT TO — I MEAN THERE ARE VERY FEW IT SEEMS MEAN THERE ARE VERY FEW IT SEEMS TO ME GOOD STRATEGIES FOR THE TO ME GOOD STRATEGIES FOR THE WHITE HOUSE AT THIS POINT, BUT WHITE HOUSE AT THIS POINT, BUT ONE OF THEM MIGHT BE THROW RUDY ONE OF THEM MIGHT BE THROW RUDY FROM THE TRAIN, BECAUSE THAT FROM THE TRAIN, BECAUSE THAT FINAL COMMUNICATION BETWEEN HIM FINAL COMMUNICATION BETWEEN HIM AND TRUMP IS NOT VERY CLEAR AND TRUMP IS NOT VERY CLEAR BUT WE KNOW EVERYTHING THAT RUDY BUT WE KNOW EVERYTHING THAT RUDY WAS DOING, AND IT’S NASTY AND WAS DOING, AND IT’S NASTY AND CORRUPT WITHOUT A DOUBT

CORRUPT WITHOUT A DOUBT >> THAT IS VERY GOOD POINT >> THAT IS VERY GOOD POINT I ALSO WONDER ABOUT WHEN I ALSO WONDER ABOUT WHEN PRIVILEGE PLAY HERE, AND THIS IS PRIVILEGE PLAY HERE, AND THIS IS KIND OF A TECHNICAL LEGAL KIND OF A TECHNICAL LEGAL QUESTION QUESTION

THERE’S THE TRADITION OF THE MOB THERE’S THE TRADITION OF THE MOB LAWYER, RIGHT? LAWYER, RIGHT? THE MOB LAWYER IS A LAWYER BUT THE MOB LAWYER IS A LAWYER BUT ALSO AN ADVISOR AND THE BENEFIT ALSO AN ADVISOR AND THE BENEFIT YOU GET FROM THAT IS LEGALLY YOU GET FROM THAT IS LEGALLY THAT’S ALL PRIVILEGED STUFF DES THAT’S ALL PRIVILEGED STUFF DES SO YOU’VE GOT — SO YOU’VE GOT — >> THEY THINK IT’S LEGAL >> THEY THINK IT’S LEGAL >> EXACTLY, THEY THINK >> EXACTLY, THEY THINK AND I’M NOT SAYING GIULIANI IS A AND I’M NOT SAYING GIULIANI IS A MOB LAWYER

MOB LAWYER WHAT I’M SAYING HERE IS THAT HIM WHAT I’M SAYING HERE IS THAT HIM CALLING HIMSELF THE PRESIDENT’S CALLING HIMSELF THE PRESIDENT’S LAWYER WHILE NOT DOING ANYTHING LAWYER WHILE NOT DOING ANYTHING WE WOULD CALL LEGAL WORK PER SE WE WOULD CALL LEGAL WORK PER SE SEEMS TO ME A PLAY TO PUT THIS SEEMS TO ME A PLAY TO PUT THIS INTO THE PRIVILEGE AND I WONDER INTO THE PRIVILEGE AND I WONDER CAN THEY HOLD UP CAN THEY HOLD UP >> LOOK, NOT IF IT’S TESTED IN A >> LOOK, NOT IF IT’S TESTED IN A COURTS, I THINK COURTS, I THINK

REMEMBER WHEN MICHAEL COHEN’S REMEMBER WHEN MICHAEL COHEN’S OFFICE WAS RAIDED AND TRUMP CAME OFFICE WAS RAIDED AND TRUMP CAME THAT DAY AND SAID THAT DAY AND SAID ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, THIS ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, THIS IS AN ATTACK ON IT AND HOW MANY IS AN ATTACK ON IT AND HOW MANY OF THOSE DOCUMENTS ENDED UP OF THOSE DOCUMENTS ENDED UP BEING PRIVILEGED WHEN A JUDGE BEING PRIVILEGED WHEN A JUDGE REVIEWED THEM? REVIEWED THEM? LIKE TEN, A VERY SMALL AMOUNT LIKE TEN, A VERY SMALL AMOUNT >> THEY HAD A WHOLE PROCESS TO >> THEY HAD A WHOLE PROCESS TO SORT THEM SORT THEM >> EXACTLY

>> EXACTLY IF YOU GET A JUDGE, IF YOU GET A IF YOU GET A JUDGE, IF YOU GET A NEUTRAL OBSERVER LOOKING — OR NEUTRAL OBSERVER LOOKING — OR NEUTRAL DECISION-MAKER WHO KNOWS NEUTRAL DECISION-MAKER WHO KNOWS THE LAW AND REALLY UNDERSTANDS THE LAW AND REALLY UNDERSTANDS WHAT THE VERY IMPORTANT WHAT THE VERY IMPORTANT PRINCIPLE OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRINCIPLE OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE ACTUALLY IS ABOUT, PRIVILEGE ACTUALLY IS ABOUT, THIS IS FACADE THIS IS FACADE AND RUDY GIULIANI HAS BEEN DOING AND RUDY GIULIANI HAS BEEN DOING THIS FOR YEARS THIS FOR YEARS

HE’S BEEN A SPOKESPERSON, NOT A HE’S BEEN A SPOKESPERSON, NOT A LAWYER LAWYER YES, HE ADVISED HIM ON MUELLER YES, HE ADVISED HIM ON MUELLER BUT YOU CAN HAVE MORE THAN ONE BUT YOU CAN HAVE MORE THAN ONE ROLE ROLE HE WAS GIVING THE PRESIDENT HE WAS GIVING THE PRESIDENT ADVICE BUT HALF THE THINGS HE ADVICE BUT HALF THE THINGS HE WAS DOING ON TV WAS PUTTING OUT WAS DOING ON TV WAS PUTTING OUT TALKING POINTS, TAKING THE STING TALKING POINTS, TAKING THE STING OUT, THINGS LIKE THAT

OUT, THINGS LIKE THAT AND EVERYTHING HE’S DONE WITH AND EVERYTHING HE’S DONE WITH UKRAINE, HE CAN SAY IT’S AS UKRAINE, HE CAN SAY IT’S AS LAWYER BUT JUST LADLING IT, IT LAWYER BUT JUST LADLING IT, IT DOESN’T MAKE IT DOESN’T MAKE IT HE WAS A DE FACTO SECRETARY OF HE WAS A DE FACTO SECRETARY OF STATE — I DON’T KNOW STATE — I DON’T KNOW

>> THAT’S MY POINT >> THAT’S MY POINT THE OTHER THING IS LIKE THE THE OTHER THING IS LIKE THE PRESIDENT HAS A LEGAL TEAM PRESIDENT HAS A LEGAL TEAM HE’S IN COURT ALL THE TIME

HE’S IN COURT ALL THE TIME THERE ARE SOME REAL HIGHLY PAID

Source: Youtube