Speaker 1: They may very well not have been evidence beyond a
Speaker 1: reasonable doubt of criminal conspiracy with the Russians, but there
Speaker 1: was in plain sight open collusion with the Russians. I
Speaker 1: guarantee you, except the little quibbles. I'm not worried about
Speaker 1: the report at all. So that was Jerry Nadler is
Speaker 1: running them, the committee that's gonna look at all this
Speaker 1: stuff and wants to get ahold of the Muller Report.
Speaker 1: And that was Rudy Giuliani, Trump's lawyer saying, I'm not
Speaker 1: worried about it. Oh boy, I hope the Muller Report
Speaker 1: thing was over. So it's not even close to over.
Speaker 1: Devilin Parrott is Washington Post reporter. He focuses on national
Speaker 1: security and law enforcement and joins us now to discuss
Speaker 1: the Muller Report, the redactions, etcetera. Devilon, how are you?
Speaker 1: I'm great? How are you? Guys? We're all going to die?
Speaker 1: What's all going to die someday? Still discussing this. That's
Speaker 1: what I think it's going to happen. Well, it's now, Jack,
Speaker 1: are you suggesting that this will kill us? It's gonna
Speaker 1: play a role. So yeah, listen, the the idea of
Speaker 1: what's redacted and by whom Devlin, I guess people are
Speaker 1: are drawn upsides and already yelling at each other preemptively. Right.
Speaker 1: It's it's that wonderful time in Washington when people argue
Speaker 1: about a document they haven't seen and about things that
Speaker 1: they about, you know, redactions that haven't been made yet. Um.
Speaker 1: So you know there's there's a complicated legal process that's
Speaker 1: going on. But because it's taking time, and because there's
Speaker 1: so much suspicion already in the water about this process,
Speaker 1: you know, you're already seeing people take shots and try
Speaker 1: to get their licks in before the documents even out there. Well,
Speaker 1: I watched the interview with Jerry Nadler and the committee
Speaker 1: chair yesterday, and he more or less stated he doesn't
Speaker 1: trust the Attorney General or believe him. So that's where
Speaker 1: we are, right, Yeah, And that's that's part of the
Speaker 1: challenge of this whole environment in that you know, so
Speaker 1: much has been reported on this, so much has been
Speaker 1: speculated on this, and look, it's obviously a political argument
Speaker 1: in some ways more so than it is even a
Speaker 1: legal argument. So people are going to What you're already
Speaker 1: seeing is people are already you know, sort of deciding
Speaker 1: what they think the report will mean to them and
Speaker 1: to their view of the world, into their view of
Speaker 1: the president. You know what I'd like to know. I
Speaker 1: wonder if behind the scenes Democrats would love a heavily
Speaker 1: redacted report. You can scream and yell that you want
Speaker 1: to get we want it all out, no redactions. But
Speaker 1: the more the more redactions there are, if there are
Speaker 1: any pages with full paragraphs redacted, then you get to
Speaker 1: make up or or or claim all kinds of stuff. Politically,
Speaker 1: I think that'd be helpful to them. I think I
Speaker 1: think there's definitely a political calculation for which that could be,
Speaker 1: you know, a very manageable situation. For example, for the Democrats. Um,
Speaker 1: because because look at the top line is probably not
Speaker 1: going to change from all this right that, um, no
Speaker 1: one else is getting charged and no one else is
Speaker 1: getting accused of a crime. Well, then do we ultimately
Speaker 1: end up with because there will be redactions. I think
Speaker 1: there'll be a lots of redactions. The American public probably
Speaker 1: won't ever see the some of the redacted parts, So politically,
Speaker 1: you know, d S will be able to claim me
Speaker 1: and that's the good stuff, that's the stuff that was
Speaker 1: gonna you know, put Trump and and and and everybody
Speaker 1: in jail and then so so voters will be in
Speaker 1: the same spot they were before, the voters that either
Speaker 1: hated Trump or liked Trump. Yeah, but I mean, I'll
Speaker 1: be honest, I don't know that that would depend on
Speaker 1: the redactions at all. You know, I could see a
Speaker 1: scenario where they released, in theory, a completely unredacted report,
Speaker 1: and that's also doesn't move voters much in either direction.
Speaker 1: I mean probably. I recall, not not to give anyone PTSD,
Speaker 1: but I recall covering, you know, five report on the
Speaker 1: Clinton email investigation. And the thing about five reports is
Speaker 1: each side can take one pages that they like the
Speaker 1: most and say, well, this is the part of the
Speaker 1: report that I care about, and this proves what I
Speaker 1: already believe. Um, I think in political terms, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: with four pages in the in the Muller report, I
Speaker 1: think there's probably gonna be politically plenty of material for
Speaker 1: both sides to work with. Devlin Barrett is a Washington
Speaker 1: Post reporter focuses on national security and law enforcement, and
Speaker 1: devil and I heard already this morning. I mean, never
Speaker 1: mind the politicians making their their broad statements but they've
Speaker 1: sent forth their surrogates to make arguments on cable news
Speaker 1: which have varying levels of accuracy and the rest of it.
Speaker 1: So the waters are so clouded. I think we get
Speaker 1: that result where Americans pretty much end up thinking what
Speaker 1: they thought before, right. And I think the question is
Speaker 1: what are the chances of this report changes folks minds,
Speaker 1: especially when you think about how many people you know
Speaker 1: already have pretty strong opinions about Trump one way or
Speaker 1: the other. Um. And you know to the degree that
Speaker 1: there is a group in the middle who are willing
Speaker 1: to genuinely, you know, ponder this and and read the
Speaker 1: stories and read maybe even read the report to think
Speaker 1: about it. Um, that's probably a small slice of the population. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I wonder about that too, because Nadler was talking, the
Speaker 1: committee chair was talking a lot about the Trump Tower meeting. Right. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, the public knows that happened, and some people
Speaker 1: are bothered by it and some people aren't. You, like
Speaker 1: you said, I'm not sure how many people's opinions will
Speaker 1: be changed with more detail. So, Devlin, are you following
Speaker 1: it all the the other side of the coin? How
Speaker 1: the investigation got started in the are you following anything
Speaker 1: with the Russian born grad student at Cambridge and the
Speaker 1: Michael Flynn's story and all of that. Is that across
Speaker 1: your rate? Are you? Oh? Sure? I mean, that's that's
Speaker 1: obviously part of the reporting, and there is you know,
Speaker 1: one of the other things that's in the works, uh,
Speaker 1: and inside the Great Years of government is there is
Speaker 1: an internal review still ongoing into how the Russian investigation
Speaker 1: began and how surveillance authority was used. But we're I'm
Speaker 1: told we're months away from that becoming that report being issued.
Speaker 1: Is Mueller going to talk to anybody at any point?
Speaker 1: Do you think he'll be on being interviewed by Oprah
Speaker 1: or somebody sixty minutes? That certainly isn't the way he
Speaker 1: is wired. However, a lot of lawmakers on the Hill
Speaker 1: has said they want to subpoena him, and they want
Speaker 1: him to testify the Congress. I can't imagine a universe
Speaker 1: in which Bob Mueller Duck's of subpoena. Um, so I
Speaker 1: think you could see that. I think that'd be open
Speaker 1: where we watch it. Oh yeah, I mean, and that'll
Speaker 1: be a big show. That'll be That'll be as big
Speaker 1: as the Kavanaugh hearings that'll be huge ratings. It probably would.
Speaker 1: I mean, look, he's a very um uh, he's a
Speaker 1: very tight lipped guy. I don't know that his answers
Speaker 1: may necessarily and you know, be that enlightening to a
Speaker 1: lot of the time. But he takes his job seriously,
Speaker 1: and I think he takes his responsibility serious. So I
Speaker 1: do expect that will probably happen at some point. My
Speaker 1: final question for Devlin Barrett to the Washington Post. Do
Speaker 1: you understand you fully comprehend that there are five hundred
Speaker 1: and seventy five days uti the election. Um, I am
Speaker 1: going to say, not my problem. We're actually keeping We're
Speaker 1: actually keeping the number on a white board in here
Speaker 1: to remind us every single day. Yeah. Well, good luck
Speaker 1: with that, guys. I'm just going to stick to the
Speaker 1: simple or easier questions of the fbhin the Justice Department. Yeah,
Speaker 1: there there you go, keeping it simple, Devlin Bear to
Speaker 1: the Wappo. Devlin's always a pleasure. Thanks a Milian, well
Speaker 1: done talking to Thank you. I'm not trying to like
Speaker 1: whole helmet too much. I don't think or not, but
Speaker 1: I just is any is any gonna how many voters
Speaker 1: in America will be moved any direction when this comes out, well,
Speaker 1: it won't be many, even very very few, just as
Speaker 1: Devilon pointed out, because the top line will surely not change.
Speaker 1: So if Trump, out of peak, out of anger and
Speaker 1: annoyance it the Russian investigation did some stuff that was
Speaker 1: obstruction of justice. C especially as a guy who's moving
Speaker 1: from the private corporate world into the world a government,
Speaker 1: or he didn't quite understand, you know, how the levers work.
Speaker 1: I could easily picture that. In fact, I'll be surprised
Speaker 1: if there isn't stuff like that. But to Trump supporters,
Speaker 1: they'll be like, okay, yeah, so he probably shouldn't have
Speaker 1: told Comey dropped the Finn Flynn thing because he's a
Speaker 1: nice guy. But does it feel like a threat to
Speaker 1: the republic? No, not really. And you know, folks on
Speaker 1: the left will see, yeah, they met with that Russian
Speaker 1: chick because she offered some dirt on Hillary. Is that
Speaker 1: collusion or conspiracy or or what is it? I don't know,
Speaker 1: nobody knows it's But did he join with the Russian government?
Speaker 1: Did don JR. Join with the Russian government in an
Speaker 1: organized plot to do X Y or Z? Probably not.
Speaker 1: So there's just gonna be you know, loads and loads
Speaker 1: of IA. The Beholder