The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewAndrew Napolitano Archive
More Self-Inflicted Presidential Legal Woes
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Last week, the investigative arm of BuzzFeed sparked a media frenzy with a report claiming that two federal law enforcement sources had informed its reporters that Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s former lawyer and confidant, had told special counsel Robert Mueller that Trump counseled him to lie to Congress about the status of Trump’s attempts to build Trump Tower Moscow.

The BuzzFeed piece also claimed that the sources revealed that Mueller’s folks had received documentary evidence from Cohen to back up his allegations.

The reason for the media frenzy was the realization by House Democrats that counseling someone to lie to a tribunal constitutes the crime of subornation of perjury and, if the tribunal is engaged in a legitimate investigation, the crime of obstruction of justice — and both of those crimes are impeachable offenses.

After the BuzzFeed piece had stirred the pot of media interest and Democrats’ lust for Trump’s political scalp, Mueller issued a very rare one-liner stating that the references in the BuzzFeed piece to what he had received from Cohen were “not accurate.”

So, did Mueller’s use of “not accurate” mean that Cohen did not, in fact, tell Mueller that the president of the United States had counseled him to lie under oath, or did it mean that Cohen made the allegation that Trump had counseled him to lie but Cohen did not, in fact, give Mueller any corroborating evidence of his allegation? Here is the back story.

In addition to tax evasion and bank fraud, Michael Cohen pleaded guilty late last year to lying to Congress. Cohen lied under oath when he told congressional investigators that Trump’s efforts to build Trump Tower Moscow ceased in January 2016 — because, according to Cohen, they actually ceased in June 2016. Cohen said he lied because Trump had asked him to do so and because Cohen wanted his testimony to be consistent with Trump’s public campaign narrative that he had no business dealings in Russia.

The BuzzFeed saga is not all black-and-white and has been exacerbated considerably by the president’s public-facing lawyer, Rudolph Giuliani. We know that Mueller’s PR person knew of the BuzzFeed piece days in advance and had numerous texts and emails with the BuzzFeed reporters. He did not discourage its publication or challenge its conclusions until 24 hours after publication. We know that neither Cohen nor his lawyers challenged the accuracy of the BuzzFeed piece.

We also know that Giuliani actually went beyond the BuzzFeed allegations. He explained to a reporter for The New Yorker that Mueller has not claimed that the Cohen allegation that President Trump counseled Cohen to lie was inaccurate; rather, the inaccurate statement in the BuzzFeed piece was its reference to the existence of texts and emails corroborating what BuzzFeed claims Trump told Cohen.


Giuliani also told the New Yorker reporter that Trump did, in fact, speak with Cohen about his testimony in advance of it. Do you think Trump told Cohen to tell the truth? That’s what the New Yorker reporter asked Giuliani. Giuliani said he knows that Trump did not counsel Cohen to lie because he listened to the tapes. Tapes? What tapes? There are tapes of the Trump-Cohen conversations about Cohen’s intended congressional testimony?

Then Giuliani said he misspoke. There are tapes — Cohen infamously recorded his conversations with his most famous client — but not about this. Giuliani then said he had examined emails and text messages and other documentary evidence and he had not found any that corroborated Cohen’s claims; so that’s what Giuliani says Mueller said was not accurate in the BuzzFeed article. “There is no corroboration that the president told him to lie.”

By narrowing the application of “not accurate,” by admitting Trump spoke to Cohen about his testimony in advance of it, by suggesting that there are tapes of Trump and Cohen discussing Cohen’s testimony but then saying he misspoke, and by stating that the Trump Organization was negotiating with Russian officials for Trump Tower Moscow up to the date of Trump’s election and then saying that that was just “a hypothetical,” Giuliani has reinforced his own image and the image of his client as being unconcerned with the truth.

Giuliani may be overly histrionic, but he is not stupid — though his legacy as a prosecutor and mayor is unraveling. My guess is he knows that Mueller has much evidence of a criminal conspiracy to receive something of value (the Hillary Clinton emails) between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence and subtly is trying to tie Trump personally to it. Such a conspiracy would be a felony and produce criminal charges against all who were a part to the agreement. Giuliani also fears that Mueller will use the Trump-Cohen conversation as evidence of obstruction of justice by the president.

So why is Giuliani revealing all this to the media? Here’s why. He is following an age-old trial lawyer practice. If the government has evidence harmful to your client, it is easier for the public and the jury to accept the harmful evidence if defense counsel reveals it first, drop by drop, rather than permit the government to release it all at once like an anvil falling into a pond.

Giuliani has told friends that from time to time during his negotiations with Mueller on Trump’s potential interview by Mueller and his team, Mueller has shown a few of his cards. Stated differently, Giuliani probably knows some of the damning evidence Mueller has on his client and has chosen to leak it out slowly and even goofily to friendly audiences so that once Mueller unloads his findings, the shock will have been dulled.

Giuliani has also told friends that he has a client who is not paying him and who does not take his advice. Does any of this look good for Trump?

Copyright 2019 Andrew P. Napolitano. Distributed by

• Category: Ideology • Tags: American Media, Donald Trump, Russiagate 
Hide 13 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Rational says:


    This is really all he said, she said, hearsay.

    If Guiliani is really a lawyer, he should be disbarred for revelaing client confidences, and harming his client, which are violations of the RPC.

    And fired for harming his client.

    Whatever Trump told Cohen, is all hearsay.

    It was all in confidence, if he said it, since Cohen was his attorney. So it is all inadmissible as evidence–even if it happened.

    I am sure you know all this, but you are just uttering mumbo jumbo.

    And you know the courts encourage perjury, right? All the lies of being assaulted are pre-printed on forms for restraining orders by the AOC—even before the woman has met the man.

    All the form orders with fake findings of fact preprinted are there—even before the case was even filed.

    I have seen judges who openly tell witnesses to lie—and nothing happens to them.

    I know Judges who lie in “FINDINGS OF FACT”, wherein they make up “facts” out of thin air, with ZERO evidence—and nothing happens to them.

    Everybody knows the American legal system is a joke. The Judges know it too.

    Let us worry about real crimes, such as Bill Clinton and his enemies who ended up dead.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  2. Rational says:



    Bundar Pichai, the Sabbath Goy CEO of Google, lied to Congress that Google does not manipulate search engine results, when, in fact, you can verify in one minute that it does.

    As shown on this website, a search for American scientists shows bizarre photos of some black people.

    So Mr. Napalitano, why are you not advocating putting Bundar in prison?

    • Replies: @Christo
  3. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:

    “Giuliani has told friends that …”

    How titillating!

    Winchell, Kilgallen, and now Napolitano. Another commentator who now aspires to play a bit part in the sleazy show.

    • Agree: Bubba
  4. JLK says:

    Between Rudy and Bob, I’m sure we’ll get to the truth eventually.

  5. Christo says:

    Mr. Napaliatno a few years ago seemed a level headed member of the white conservative side, back during the Obama years. Then his whole tone changed in his articles when Trump was elected and they started to mention and push total anti-Trump falsehoods and slants , like this line in this article.

    ” My guess is he knows that Mueller has much evidence of a criminal conspiracy to receive something of value (the Hillary Clinton emails) between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence and subtly is trying to tie Trump personally to it.”

    I run by the rule anything said by an agent of the MSM of the/an anti-trump narrative is by default anti-white as Any mention of Russian/Trump collusion is a direct attack on white franchise and part of the continuing program to de- legitimatize white “conservative” Americans, their rights, as well as the result of the last presidential election.

    This is the worst thing about “Never Trump” Republicans , such as “Judge” Napalitano , and the rest of the cluck Republicans( the controlled stooges of opposition to the commie democrats). They can hate Trump all they want on a personal level , but when they call into question that Trump was legitimately elected , they can all be put on the express ride* to Hell AFAIC , along with all the other enemies of Whites/America, which they demonstrate themselves to be.

  6. TheOldOne says:

    Mr. Napolitano and Mr. Reed should both be eliminated from this site; they add nothing.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @Bubba
  7. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:

    Well, Mr. Napolitano does provide some perspective, a window into the lying Establishment.

    I can’t recall the last time he was defended in a thread here. He should be kept on until, citing some Badthink, he sanctimoniously scoots.

  8. Anon[189] • Disclaimer says:

    Maybe, could be, who knows . . blah, blah, blah. It’s all idle speculation by people who know nothing.

    What everyone does know is that Mueller has nothing — and never will — regarding the imaginary Russian hacking and collusion that he was charged to prosecute. All he has been doing for two years is trying to entrap people into “process” crimes and doing taxpayer funded, subpoena-driven, opposition research for the Democrats.

    In the end, he’ll either issue a BS indictment against Trump or else drop a steaming load of this BS in a “report” to Congress just before the 2020 election in an attempt to cripple Trump’s reelection. Whatever he does will rip the country apart, but the Trump-haters don’t care.

  9. @Rational

    Neither Napolitano nor our judicial system deserves our basic respect.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  10. Has it been referred to as the Mueller Fishing Expedition over there in the US yet? I would have thought so by now.

    My friends in the US tell me already that they cannot remember the nation being more divided.

  11. Bubba says:

    I agree that Fred Reed is a clown who doesn’t add anything here and is the equivalent (in the old days) of a rambling town drunk on this site.

    Napolitano is an excellent useful idiot for the deep state and their machinations. I take him seriously as the defender of all that is evil with our government. As for tossing him off of, well, I tend to think, “Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.”

  12. Corvinus says:

    “Neither Napolitano nor our judicial system deserves our basic respect.”

    Actually, they demand our respect for the rule of law and the judges and prosecutors who seek to ensure justice prevails on a daily basis. What a profoundly moronic statement you made.

    As far as the Mueller investigation is concerned, it is right on course. It looks like Trump and his team will be indicted for crimes against the Constitution. What a remarkably complex legal case!

  13. buckwheat says:

    That this clown Napolitano was anything more than a traffic court judge is a perversion of justice.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Andrew Napolitano Comments via RSS
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The sources of America’s immigration problems—and a possible solution
The evidence is clear — but often ignored