Mueller Zooms In on Trump Tower Cover Story
Source: NYT
The latest witness to be called for an interview about the episode was Mark Corallo, who served as a spokesman for Mr. Trumps legal team before resigning in July. Mr. Corallo received an interview request last week from the special counsel and has agreed to the interview, according to three people with knowledge of the request.
Mr. Corallo is planning to tell Mr. Mueller about a previously undisclosed conference call with Mr. Trump and Hope Hicks, the White House communications director, according to the three people. Mr. Corallo planned to tell investigators that Ms. Hicks said during the call that emails written by Donald Trump Jr. before the Trump Tower meeting in which the younger Mr. Trump said he was eager to receive political dirt about Mrs. Clinton from the Russians will never get out. That left Mr. Corallo with concerns that Ms. Hicks could be contemplating obstructing justice, the people said.
-snip-
In Mr. Corallos account which he provided contemporaneously to three colleagues who later gave it to The Times he told both Mr. Trump and Ms. Hicks that the statement drafted aboard Air Force One would backfire because documents would eventually surface showing that the meeting had been set up for the Trump campaign to get political dirt about Mrs. Clinton from the Russians.
According to his account, Ms. Hicks responded that the emails will never get out because only a few people had access to them. Mr. Corallo, who worked as a Justice Department spokesman during the George W. Bush administration, told colleagues he was alarmed not only by what Ms. Hicks had said either she was being naïve or was suggesting that the emails could be withheld from investigators but also that she had said it in front of the president without a lawyer on the phone and that the conversation could not be protected by attorney-client privilege.
-snip-
Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/31/us/politics/trump-russia-hope-hicks-mueller.html
The Times contacted Corallo today about what those three colleagues had said, and he said he didn't dispute any of what they'd told the Times, though he wouldn't add to it.
riversedge
(70,289 posts)Cosmocat
(14,568 posts)Significant in this ...
Leghorn21
(13,526 posts)FakeNoose
(32,726 posts)Corallo didn't quit his job until summer of 2017. He could do a lot of dirty work in the meantime, am I right?
Hope Hicks has already testified to Mueller once, he can get her back any time he hears something from Corallo (or Bannon) that doesn't jive with what she told him. These cheesy two-bit hucksters are all going down.
Leghorn21
(13,526 posts)AT LEAST ONCE in his life!!? But yes, he was on the trump train and who knows whatall that can mean, really (nothing particularly beneficial, most likely, dammit)...as usual, we shall wait and see...
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)It was during their internal deliberations process likely triggered by something or someone cluing them in around that time ... that the meeting was about to be exposed publicly. I don't get the feeling that the convo was around June 2016.
Also ... sorry but pet peeve ... the word is JIBE
FakeNoose
(32,726 posts)It seems Corallo did resign immediately - within a day or two of hearing about it.
You're correct on "jibe" - thanks!
wishstar
(5,271 posts)and he is not willing to get swept up in the the Trump criminality
bucolic_frolic
(43,259 posts)as soon as they are faced with the long arm of the law.
But also, like this guy, some seem to have been offended or alarmed at what was going on and faded to the background. They do remember when things didn't sound so good.
UpInArms
(51,284 posts)muellertime
BigmanPigman
(51,626 posts)the exact same time...strange timing.
procon
(15,805 posts)Hope Hicks is unqualified to even be entrusted to shred paper, and yet she's blabbing away like she's got nothing to fear. Lock her up!
GusBob
(7,286 posts)Basically admitting they were doing something wrong
orangecrush
(19,611 posts)is my favorite time!
SWBTATTReg
(22,156 posts)highplainsdem
(49,029 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,034 posts)Scruffy1
(3,256 posts)Lot's of speculation. Don't get too excited. We may all get disappointed in the outcome. Let's keep our eyes on the elction. This investigation could gone as long as Whitewater did.
Dan
(3,579 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)residentcynic
(32 posts)It's great to hear things are happening, but I'm ready for some sort of action. The longer this brews, the more chance there is of it getting derailed by underhanded tricks.
Julian Englis
(2,309 posts)highplainsdem
(49,029 posts)Cha
(297,574 posts)DesertRat
(27,995 posts)DeminPennswoods
(15,290 posts)to Mueller's investigators. If she didn't mention this call, which sounds like she didn't, she's guilty of lying to the FBI. That's likely why her atty was so adamant this call didn't happen. I thought it was interesting that when the former prosecutors/FBI'ers employed by MSNBC were asked if the fact that Hicks is young and probably naive would make law enforcement go a little easier on her, they all said, nope, she'll be treated just like everyone else.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)The kind that follow this pattern "The idea that so-and-so did (notion that something similar to the accusation happened, but actually a clever straw-man) ... is preposterous/reckless/beyond pale/etc!".
They do that shit ALL THE FRIGGIN' TIME cause nobody in media calls them out ... in fact they then insist that these are REAL denials ... when they are IN FACT ... NOTHING OF THE KIND.
And neither is "FAKE NEWS!"
d_r
(6,907 posts)Ms. Hicks said during the call that emails written by Donald Trump Jr. before the Trump Tower meeting in which the younger Mr. Trump said he was eager to receive political dirt about Mrs. Clinton from the Russians will never get out.
Narrator: "They would."
Cha
(297,574 posts)uh huh!
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)Couldn't be more friggin' obvious ... Russia's were offering 'dirt' in exchange for something related to the "Adoptions Issue", hint hint, nudge nudge. You scratch our back we scratch yours ...
I think it's possible however that only Manafort and his peeps (and the Russians) really knew what that was a code for.
One might presume that Donald would be aware but it's hard to say. It's an AWFUL cover story if he actually did know the implication of 'adoptions' that's for sure.
But maybe he thought nobody else would pick up on the connection cause he's so much smarter than the rest of the world, while he also thought that it may come out that 'adoptions' were discussed and the best sorts of lies are based on some sort of truth so lets go with that.
In the end if it's never proven that they TOOK the 'dirt', nor offered to 'help with the adoptions issue' ... it's likely this meeting is good for little more than providing some innuendo and reasonable suspicion, nothing illegal. Though Hope may've really bolstered the obstruction case...
randr
(12,414 posts)and ignores a much larger issue of Russian manipulation deep inside the GOP
dembotoz
(16,826 posts)Being a crook is business as usual.
He has always been a crook and will always be a crook