On Tuesday’s Tennessee Star Report with Steve Gill and Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 am to 8:00 am – Gill and Leahy talked to One America News Networks Neil McCabe about Mueller’s upcoming testimony and how the Democrats hope that he will say things that were not in the report in effort to open up impeachment hearings. The team noted that if Mueller does answer questions from Democrats that this would leave the window open for Republicans to hold him in contempt.
Towards the end of the segment, the team discussed the possibility that the Mueller team had been leaking to Democrats during the entire investigation.
Gill: A lot of stuff going on and to help us sort out some of it, Neil McCabe from One America News Network. Neil, good to have you back with us.
McCabe: Hey, good morning. How’s it going?
Gill: It tires me out just going down the list of all the stuff that’s going to happen.
Leahy: Yeah. Neil, so you interviewed reporter John Solomon the other day. What did he have to tell you about James Comey and Robert Mueller?
McCabe: What’s interesting is everyone talks about the Mueller report but like a lot of organizations, you have to look at who their staff is and who’s actually working for them. And a lot of times who their Deputy is. And so Robert Mueller’s first Deputy was Peter Strzok. And so it’s like let that sink in right? Peter Strzok.
Leahy: Peter Strzok of the FBI lovebirds? When he was at the FBI his deputy was Peter Strzok?
McCabe: Right. And then when the IG of Justice Department, the Inspector General, found the text messages between Paige and Strzok, Strzok had to go. Of course, Strzock testified that Mueller had no problem with him. Strzok also said that Mueller didn’t think it was a conflict of interest that he was showing any bias. He just felt the appearance was bad. (Leahy laughs) The next guy that Mueller picked is Andrew Weissman.
Leahy: Oh, and he is an attack dog isn’t he? Tell us a little bit about Attorney Weissman’s background.
McCabe: So Weissman is a guy who went after Enron. Blew up the Enron prosecution. Arthur Anderson was one of the largest accounting firms in the country. Had eighty thousand employees. He went after those guys and drove them out of business. And a few lawyers for Arthur Anderson sort of stuck around with the corporate shell after they declared bankruptcy and everyone was laid off.
But a small group of lawyers sort of kept it going and they appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled nine zero that Weissman was completely out of order in his prosecution and threw out all the convictions. But everybody had lost their job and so it didn’t really matter.
I mean this guy is absolutely out of control. He’s the guy that did the no-knock raid on Manafort. Dragging a 70-year-old man out of bed at two in the morning on basically paperwork charges. And so Solomon, what he’s saying is that we now know that Solomon was the guy who was in charge of hiring for Mueller…
Leahy: And you mean Weissman was the guy in charge of hiring?
McCabe: Yeah. Weissman was the guy driving, so when we talk about all those angry Democrats, it was Weissman who was hand-selecting them. Weissman who wrote a check to Hillary Clinton. And so…
Leahy: Not exactly unbiased there. (Leahy chuckles)
McCabe: The other thing is that two weeks into taking the job, Mueller reached out to some Ukrainian guy who is up on charges. I don’t know, I think he’s on the lamb right? So we have him come into the United States to face his charges. Mueller made his offer saying, “If you testify that you helped collude with the Trump campaign, I will make all your charges go away.” So two weeks into the job…
Leahy: Was he trying to induce false testimony? Is that the claim here?
McCabe: Yes. And it also says we have nothing. Because no one was talking about the Ukrainians. And so Mueller was basically, “I have nothing. But if we get this stooge to say he worked with the Trump campaign, then we’ll have something.” And so, over and over again it’s the sort of thing proving the negative right? If I accuse you of stealing that candy bar…
Leahy: Hmm hmm.
McCabe: I can keep accusing you for a thousand years. Because I’m proving a negative. And that’s why this whole justice system is supposed to be on the other side. The proof is on the prosecution, not on the defense.
Leahy: So Neil when Mueller testifies tomorrow, I think he’ll be first House Intelligence then-House Judiciary. Will a Republican ask him about this alleged Ukrainian inducement to give false testimony?
McCabe: I don’t have word on that. Because there’s just so much to ask Mueller. No one has ever faced cross-examination. His charges have never been challenged. And so the way Mueller set it up is he’s basically done four hundred page dump where he trashes innocent Americans. Suggests that they broke laws but he won’t give anybody a chance to go to court.
He includes embarrassing conversation, foul language that has nothing to do with the point. And he just does it to embarrass people and to trash their reputations. I mean, what are you going to do? It would cost a million dollars to defend yourself with a special prosecutor. It’s like this free play. And so they spent forty million dollars on opposition research and then they dump this thing on the media.
The reason why Mueller didn’t want to testify is he didn’t want Republicans to ask him about this BS obstruction of justice charges or why if you knew from day one that there was not collusion why didn’t you say something before the twenty eighteen midterms? Why did you drag this thing out from maximum damage to the President and the Republican party?
Gill: One of the key questions is going to be, at what point did you know, Bob Mueller, that there was no collusion? Apparently, it was about eighteen months before they closed things out. Spent millions more. Wasted tons of taxpayer dollars. But what happens Neil if he does, as everybody expects him to do, he just right from the outset is going, I will not testify to anything beyond exactly what’s in my report.
And if he just repeats that ad nauseum, like you have a testimony sometimes from folks who say, “On the advice of my counsel I’m exercising my fifth amendment rights.” After he repeats about a dozen times, “I am not testifying beyond what is actually in my report. The report speaks for itself.” After we hear that drone on twenty times, will people keep pressing him?
McCabe: The Democrats hope that he will say stuff that was not in the report so they can then take that as an excuse to open up impeachment hearings.
Gill: And if he does that, then from a legal terminology, that opens the door to the Republicans to say, “No, you’ve already opened the door beyond your report with the Democrat questioning. Now you have to answer our questions or we’re going to seek to hold you in contempt.”
The justice department has given Mueller an out. By saying that Mueller is not allowed to testify beyond his brief. And Mueller, even though he’s no longer special council, he is an officer of the court and he has to obey his client which is the Justice Department.
And what you find Steve is that lawyers are usually more cooperative because they don’t want to lose their law license. And so that’s why a lot of times a regular guy like me, I could say blow off a congressional subpoena. A lawyer never blows off a congressional subpoena. And so that’s what Mueller’s facing.
Leahy: Do you expect anything new to come up in this testimony?
McCabe: The only new thing that could come up is that the Mueller team has been leaking to Democrats the whole time. And we saw that in the Katie McFarland confirmation hearings where the team for McFarland asked to review her emails that she used during the transition and she was told no they were given to Mueller and then Mueller refused to let her look at them. And then Senator Cory Booker was quoting directly from Katie McFarland’s… (Inaudible cross talk)
Leahy: (Leahy laughs) A classic two-step hit.
Listen to the full hour:
– – –