Rachel Maddow takes a look at the days top political news stories. Comments are anything to go by. The New York Times reported that the serving White House Counsel Don Mcgahn has done more than 30 hours of voluntary interviews with the special Counsel Robert Mueller and his team of prosecutors. Shortly there after we got new reporting from the times about the president s personal lawyer being sqozed, for look of a better term. The Wall Street Journal is first on the story as they have bone the criminal intrigue surrounding president trumps long time lawyer Michael Cohen from the very beginning. But following the initial reporting a couple weeks ago that the potential charges Michael Cohen might be facing, now the New York Times as of yesterday and the Associated Press as of today, who have both match that had story. So the Wall Street Journal and the ap and the New York Times, all now reporting that Michael Cohens legal vulnerability may be at least in part rehated to
interesting, right . Lawyers getting lawyers is one thing. Lawyers becoming corroborating witnesses is an even bigger thing. I think there are steps we should take to avoid being spun or misled on both those stories. So well get to some of that ahead tonight. I feel like, when you see a story about mcgahn or cohen coming down the pike, unless it has publicly verifiable information, tread lightly. Dont go too fast around this corner. This may be someone trying to trip you up. There have been a bunch of new developments today and into this evening including one that reflights this guy. Remember this guy . He is the one person who has gone to prison already. Actually served his custodial sentence in the russia scandal. His name is alex van der zwan. He laid to investigators about his role in one of Paul Manaforts foreign lobbying gigs. It has always been possible there was a Big Biographical coincidence about him. It is totally possible its a coincidence. But one of the more intriguing details about him, who has served his time in prison. We think hes left the country since serving his anaheim priti prison. It has been fascinating to know that his fatherinlaw is a Russian Oligarch close to Vladimir Putin who turns up in the Christopher Steel dossier. He is married to the daughter of this man, herman khan, one of three wealthy russians who control a Banking Empire called alpha bank. It has popped up in a couple of different ways. Defamation lawsuit against Christopher Steel and the intelligence firm. The dossier didnt really say anything all that damning about alpha bank. It described herman khan. He described them as having a close relationship with putin. They said significant favors continue to be done in both directions. Still giving still giving informal advice to putin. Especially on the u. S. So thats whats in the steel dossier. They could each other favors. Further, they maybe funneled money to putin in his st. Petersburg days. This is not the worlds most salacious stuff. But it has tina life of its own. Republicans in congress, president trump, the white house more broadly, they have spent months trying to turn the steel dossier itself boo a huge scandal. It is against one serving Justice Department official. Because bruce ohrs wife worked at fusion gps. Mr. Ohr appears to have contact himself with Christopher Steel during the campaign. So House Republicans have gone along with the attacks on the dossier, the attacks on anybody associated with the dossier, and they are now going i know what the attacks on the Justice Department official who the Justice Department has singled out as being connected to the dossier. House republicans have summoned bruce ohr. They threatened a subpoena but
he will appear voluntarily. So there is been all this drama around the steele dossier. The other threatening action related to the steele dossier has been lawsuits. These lawsuits, like the one, filed by herman khan. Today a judge dismissed the Defamation Lawsuits against Christopher Steele and orbis business intelligence. It was dismissed with prejudice which means the plaintiffs cannot bring it up again. So alpha bank. We still dont know if there was anything operational when it came to efforts to interfere in the 2016 election or any potential Trump Campaign involvement in that effort. Weve seen no Firm Evidence but lots of suggestions about that possibility. We still dont know if it is
just a coincidence. We still dont know if theres anything shady about the fact brian, hired by alpha bank to get them out of that russia related scandal ends up in a senior position at the u. S. Justice department. But at least we do have this one conclusive statement today. The effort to sue, to make their connection to the steele dossier go away. Today that lawsuit failed in a way that seems quite definitive. The next person to go to prison in the Trump Scandal might be George Papadopoulos. Late friday we learned the special counsel recommended to the judge in this case that George Papadopoulos should serve up to six months in prison. The actual recommendation range it was zero to six months in prison. The great lynn sweet at the Chicago Sun Times report thatGeorge Papadopouloss lawyers intend to ask the judge in this case for zero jail time. The formal response to the Sentencing Recommendation is due at the end of next week. When you look at the Sentencing Recommendation for George Papadopoulos from the special counsels office, from the prosecutors, it was really not good for him. Aside from the range of potential prison time they are suggesting, the way they describe papadopouloss behavior is not complimentary to him. The prosecutors told the court, the Plea Agreement entered into was not a standard cooperation agreement. Prosecutors merely agreed to bring to the courts attention at sentencing the defendants efforts to cooperate with the government. What prosecutors ended up bringing to the courts attention at sentencing was tenpage long list of ways in which George Papadopoulos didnt
help them out at all. Quote, the defendant did not provide substantial assistance. The prosecutors later said that he lied over and over again in ways that materially hurt the governments case. Quote, the defendants crime was serious, both in terms of the underlying conduct and its effect on the investigation. The defendant knew the questions he was asked by the fbi were important and he knew his answers were false at the time he gave them. His lies negatively affected fbis russia investigation and prevented the fbi from effectively identifying and confronting witnesses in a timely fashion. They were not momentary lapses. He lied repeatedly over the course of more than two hours. The sentence imposed should reflect lying to federal investigators has real consequences. Especially where the defendant lied to investigators about critical facts and an investigation of national importance. After having been explicitly warned that lying to the fbi is a federal offense. The nature and circumstances of the Offense Warrant a sentence of incarceration. So a couple things to watch. Number one, this is the government emphatically saying, George Papadopoulos should do jail time. According to lynn sweets report, they said he shouldnt do any jail time at all. But reference there that i read from the Sentencing Recommendation, there part here. The Plea Agreement sweer into was not a standard cooperation agreement. That raises the possibility George Papadopoulos may have some ongoing criminal liability here. This is not a recommendation that says, you know, listen, judge, our deal has been upheld on both sides. This guy was really helpful to us. Not that. Theyre saying he didnt help us
and he lied. This was not a formal agreement. We said we told the judge, if he helped us when it came time. Theyre saying, no, he didnt help us. The prospect of additional criminal liability. Some indictment, some new indictment in the future. Now that we know the government says he wasnt an earnest cooperator, that now looms over this little part of this case. And the sense that there is something important unresolved and it comes to George Papadopoulos was helped along by this Public Statement that he made today on twitter. 4 00 this afternoon. Ill quote it directly. Quote, been a hell of a year. Decisions. As a point of fact im not sure how many decisions he has to make. Well get some Expert Advice on that in a moment. The last set of developments in todays news related to the
scandal. Centered around the campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, who incidentally, has a notable new neighbor. As of this weekend. In a move that was described as surprise to all involved friday night, look who moved in. Accused Russian Foreign agent maria butina. On friday night was moved from the jail in d. C. Where she was arrested in july. They took her out of that jail friday night and brought her over to where Paul Manafort lives now which is the federal lockup in xanld rhea, virginia. The reason we have this unflattering picture of her is because i think shes been moved to that new facility in virginia. You see the alexandria sheriffs office. I think we get mug shots from that facility. She hasnt been convicted of anything. Shes being held in jail before her trial because prosecutors
thought she would be a flight risk. Basically, they argued to the judge that the russians would spirit her out of the country before she cover face charges if the judge left her out on the street. Thats why she has not been let out on the street. But now for whatever reason, they have moved her from one lockup. That means shes only about two blocks away from where Paul Manaforts trial has been underway in virginia. Thats not the courthouse where shell be tried. Shell be tried in washington, d. C. We know it is not unheard of for people waiting to end up in this jail. And it is surprising that nobody knows why she was moved. According to her lawyer, neither she nor her lawyer had any notice before it happened 40 night. Her attorney said, i got a
collect call. He visited her this morning. She was not in, i am still unaware of the reason. We contacted him today to see if he had learned today why his client was moved from d. C. To virginia. He told us, quote, no news. I have no answers yet. You can ask the Marshals Service. It is their call. We did ask the Marshals Service and they didnt call us back. Surprise theres no reason to think that theyll have contact with each other while theyre in the same jail but it is weird that they are now both in the same jail. We are expecting to get prosecutors list of evidence that they planned to use against
manafort in his next criminal trial due to start next month in Federal Court in d. C. The evidence list has been described as containing over 1,000 items. The deadline for the list is to be made public, is that it should be made public tomorrow. That should be a big long list. It should be a very interesting window into what Paul Manaforts next prosecution might look like. And meanwhile, were still waiting on the jury and his first felony trial. The jury considering manaforts fate in virginia, they deliberated all day thursday, they deliberated all day friday. The judge sent them home over the week. Theyve deliberated all day today. At 4 49 today, the judge announced the jury would stay late. Last week they broke at 5 00. Today, they asked to deliberate until later. Until at least 6 15 p. M. Maybe they might be planning to release a verdict on manafort tonight. That turned out not to be the case. The court reconvened after 6 00 and many the judge announced, once again no verdict. They will come back tomorrow to start deliberating again at 9 30 in the morning. So two questions. With a jury deliberating over the course of nine hours today and 24 hours in total. Is that starting to feel like a long time some is that a long deliberation and does it mean anything . If youre an attorney, they go through these long stretches. Do you find it to be heartening or disheartening or do we just not know . Second question. Last question. Is it a little weird that the
jury is like on the loose . Out in the wild . Not sequestered . Theyre just sent home every night. Theyre sent home the whole weekend. The judge himself has suggested that jurors might reasonably be afraid for their own safety in this case. He stated that hes received threats in conjunction with this case. He cited the threats in conjunction with not releasing the names. And they are freely mingling with reporters and anybody else who has business at the xanld rhea Federal Courthouse. Meanwhile, with these jurors, sort of on the loose despite that the judge is talking about potential danger they might be in, the judge has been admonishing them every day that they shouldnt consume any media about the case. This is unusual. Theres a certain amount of pressure in this case on, which these jurors are deliberating. The president of the United States has repeatedly made Public Statements praising the defendant. Saying the defendant is being mistreated. Calling his prosecution sad. And on the other side, every day, and sometimes two, three, four, six times a day, the president makes Public Statements in writing and out loud denouncing the prosecution in this case. Hes been praising the defendant, Paul Manafort, and hes been denouncing the prosecution. The special counsels office. The president daily renounces them. It might be difficult for jurors to avoid seeing any mention of the fact. That the president has been calling the prosecutors in this case, quote, a national disgrace. Saying this is a rigged investigation. The president deriding robert
mueller and the special counsels office. President s in the past have avoided weighing in on criminal cases so as to avoid the appearance in a penning case. With this president it is totally the obvious. He is absolutely trying to influence the case. And i know it is rare to sequester a jury, to put a jury in a hotel and not give them any contact with their homes or the outside world until later. But the president of the United States is directing at this case on a daily basis, clearly trying to influence the verdict of the jury. Is this one of those cases where the jury should have been sequestered . Joining us now, Barbara Mcquaid thank you so much. Nice to see you. My pleasure to see you. It is my impression as i rare thing for a jury to be sequestered but judges do sometimes order it, and particularly high profile cases or when theres a particularly high prediction jurors under normal circumstances wont be able to have avoid Media Exposure or pressure on their verdict. Is that basically true . Yeah. It is very rare that a jury would be sequestered. Ive never seen in it Federal Court. I know it has happened in some high profile cases. I think the Bill Cosby Case was one, o. J. Simpson, casey anthony, george zimmerman. So a few high profile cases. But i know one difference is that theyre not televised. So youre not likely to see
television coverage. So another reason is you dome want to put pressure on jurors to get done and get on with their lives and sequestration to cause them to be hasty in their decision. Aside from that, expense. Ive never seen it done in Federal Court. In terms of the president s remarks in this case, i see his remarks being so starkly positive toward the defendant, unfair prosecution of the defendant, and his withering attacks, even in personal terms against the president. Would that, what can the judge do to protect them . The judge does give that instruction. A standard instruction. When i was in court he gave that instruction every day. Not to read anything in the media. To discuss the case. Theres case law that says jurors are presumed to have followed their instructions unless you can show otherwise. So people expect that juries will follow that advice. There are four alternates in this case so if someone were to come in and say, i was at home and i overheard this on the television. Or someone blurted this out or someone told me trump said these things. They could be replaced with alternate. But i think the judge would ask you, do you think you could set it