Did Jared Kushner Try to Preemptively Undercut Mike Flynn at the Enquirer?

One thing about the Mueller investigation I’ve gone back and forth on is the degree to which Jared Kushner is in legal trouble. While he left the June 9, 2016 meeting before any agreement to enter a conspiracy might be said to have been reached, his efforts to set up a back channel during the transition period — and the degree to which he appeared to be self-dealing rather than representing the interests of the United States — seemed to expose him to different legal problems.

Then there’s the record on Mike Flynn. A key CNN report dated November 30, the day before Flynn flipped, had suggested — given the then publicly known events — that Mueller interviewed Jared in advance of Flynn’s plea agreement, in what might have been a last ditch effort to allow Jared to exonerate Flynn.

Mueller’s team specifically asked Kushner about former national security advisor Michael Flynn, who is under investigation by the special counsel, two sources said. Flynn was the dominant topic of the conversation, one of the sources said.


The conversation lasted less than 90 minutes, one person familiar with the meeting said, adding that Mueller’s team asked Kushner to clear up some questions he was asked by lawmakers and details that emerged through media reports. One source said the nature of this conversation was principally to make sure Kushner doesn’t have information that exonerates Flynn.

But Flynn’s sentencing memo revealed that he had five proffer meetings before he signed the agreement.

He participated in five pre-plea proffer sessions with the Special Counsel’s Office and fourteen additional meetings with the Government pursuant to the Plea Agreement entered on December 1, 2017.

And, per CNN, Mueller was asking other witnesses about Jared at the time, too.

The meeting took place around the same time the special counsel asked witnesses about Kushner’s role in the firing of former FBI Director James Comey and his relationship with Flynn, these people said.

That (plus reports that Flynn cooperated shortly after he was asked) suggests the meeting with Kushner may well have come after some of those proffer meetings involving Flynn, which would in turn suggest that Mueller was locking in Jared’s testimony with that short interview before revealing that Flynn was cooperating.

Still, Jared is one of the few people involved in this scandal with a very competent defense attorney, and after Abbe Lowell announced that Jared had had a much longer interview with Mueller in April and had gotten a (Trump-demanded) security clearance, I started to believe that Lowell had performed another master stroke as a defense attorney.

Then, in mid-April, Kushner sat for six to seven hours of questions that covered many topics, including his work on the Trump campaign, the transition and in the White House and about Trump’s decision in May 2017 to fire Comey.

The special counsel’s questioning focused on Kushner’s work with Trump and did not include topics such as Kushner’s personal finances or those of his family business, Kushner Companies, according to the person familiar with the matter.

Which brings us to this story from the Daily Beast, revealing that Jared (who worked the press assiduously when he owned the Observer) took over Michael Cohen’s duties of planting stories in the National Enquirer after Cohen was denied a job in the Administration.

During the early months of the Trump era, Kushner performed the task admirably, discussing with Pecker various issues over the phone, including everything from international relations to media gossip, according to four sources familiar with the situation. Pecker, for his part, bragged to people that he was speaking to the president’s son-in-law and, more generally, about the level of access he had to the upper echelons of the West Wing, two sources with knowledge of the relationship recounted.

TDB focuses on Trump’s threat to deal dirt on Scarborough and Mika (I had been wondered who had orchestrated that threat) and, rightly, the big propaganda piece that Mohamed bin Salman’s unregistered assassination crisis repair agent, Jared, planted.

Starting in late 2016, AMI’s priorities shifted from a potential business deal with Kushner to one focused on access to political power. Shortly after the Trump presidency began, Kushner and Pecker talked repeatedly, on subjects ranging from relations with the Saudi regime, to possible dirt that the Enquirer had on Morning Joe’s Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough, according to the four sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

AMI, like Kushner, cozied up to the despotic Saudi government, which included the production of a glossy propaganda magazine boosting Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

Last year, Brzezinski and Scarborough, who had increasingly become Trump critics, made the explosive allegation that three senior aides to President Trump “warned” the couple that the Enquirer would publish a negative story on them unless they “begged” Trump to intervene on their behalf. The couple’s account was disputed by White House officials, who said the conversations were far more cordial than the TV hosts described.

As The Daily Beast reported last year, Kushner was one of the senior officials who privately spoke to Scarborough about the matter. According to two White House officials, Scarborough had “calmly sought” advice from Kushner, who “recommended he speak with the president.” Scarborough did not know that Kushner had also been directly in touch with the Enquirer’s publisher at the time, according to a source familiar with the matter.

But I’m just as interested in the spread, from the same period as the Saudi propaganda, seemingly pre-empting a Flynn cooperation agreement with Mueller by attacking him as “the Russian spy in Trump’s midst.”

The claim that “Trump catches Russia’s White House spy” — clearly an attempt to smear Mike Flynn — actually got me to drop the $4.99 for a copy of the National Enquirer to read the hit job. And it’s actually more than a contrived effort to claim Flynn is a Russian spy: it’s a four-page spread, implicating Hillary and Mike Pence, too.


While the Flynn story has been viewed — particularly alongside unsubstantiated claims that Flynn is cooperating with the FBI — as an attempt to damage him for snitching, it almost certainly dates to earlier than more recent attacks on Flynn, and in conjunction with stories of loyalty oaths from Pence appears tame by comparison.

If he did, the newly cooperative David Pecker has probably already made that clear to authorities.

If Jared — the guy whom Flynn witnessed trying to set up a back channel with Russia — planted a smear attempting to paint Flynn as a Russian infiltrator, it suggests he had reason all the way back in March to try to undercut Flynn. And then, in November, when he had chance to help Flynn out of his legal woes in November, he reportedly did not do so.

It still never pays to bet against the legal skills of Abbe Lowell. Jared is still likely to skate.

But these details sure change my understanding about which collusion egg Mueller cracked first.

As I disclosed in July, I provided information to the FBI on issues related to the Mueller investigation, so I’m going to include disclosure statements on Mueller investigation posts from here on out. I will include the disclosure whether or not the stuff I shared with the FBI pertains to the subject of the post. 

93 replies
  1. CaliLawyer says:

    A bit off topic, but found this from Vox totally hilarious and appropriate:
    “More specifically, Manafort provided information to the White House as to how to discredit the so-called Steele dossier, a report written by Christopher Steele, a former head of the Russia desk for the British intelligence agency MI6, about alleged ties that Trump and his associates had to Russia. (Manafort provided background to the White House’s attorneys about specific allegations and information in the dossier that he said was suspect.)”

    I mean, who better to ask, lol?

    • CaliLawyer says:

      I just can’t get over the image of Manafort fact-checking the Steele memo with Trump. Veep-worthy, omg too funny. Can’t wait for the movie to come out. Too bad Altman isn’t around to make it.

    • jf-fl says:

      time is approaching for next EW dossier post.  why?

      BOOM: https://www.lawfareblog.com/steele-dossier-retrospective

      “In that sense, the dossier is similar to an FBI 302 form or a DEA 6 form. Both of those forms are used by special agents of the FBI and DEA, respectively, to record what they are told by witnesses during investigations. The substance of these memoranda can be true or false, but the recording of information is (or should be) accurate. In that sense, notes taken by a special agent have much in common with the notes that a journalist might take while covering a story—the substance of those notes could be true or false, depending on what the source tells the journalist, but the transcription should be accurate. ”


      Also: https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1073576844228730880

      “@emptywheel Am I allowed to have whiskey for breakfast if my day includes debunking the Steele dossier again?”

      Chuck Rosenberg (aka human xanax) vs Marcy Wheeler.   Sounds like an article boring enough for a site about stuff which goes around but which evokes having no spokes/hub.    (If really good maybe you force Wittes to rig his cannon to be more nuanced and detailed?)

  2. alaura says:

    Question for the lawyers…what are proffer meetings?  Thanks.
                                  “…he had five proffer meetings before he signed the agreement…”

    • Peterr says:

      IANAL, but a proffer meeting is the opening gambit in plea bargaining. The defendant comes in and after the prosecution says “Nothing you say here will be used against you”, lays out what they have to tell about the larger case. “If I can give you X, Y, and Z about other criminals and their behavior (including potential corroborating materials), and if I truthfully and to the best of my ability answer any and all questions you pose to me, how far will you reduce my sentence?”

    • chicago_bunny says:

      It is a meeting where the criminal defendant meets with the prosecutor and shares knowledge regarding potential crimes.  The parties agree that the statements by the defendant will not be used against him or her in later proceedings.

      • bmaz says:

        Yeah, sorry, that is, uh, incomplete. This type of discussion between the government and putative defendant often takes place over a long time and many meetings.

        • davidchop says:

          Thanks for chiming in bmaz.

          This is why alaura was right to post the question here rather than simply Googling it as others have suggested (grrr). Google is an advertising machine, not an answer generating machine. It’s chock-a-block full of incomplete, misleading, and just plain wrong answers.


  3. Peterr says:

    From the post:

    If Jared — the guy whom Flynn witnessed trying to set up a back channel with Russia — planted a smear attempting to paint Flynn as a Russian infiltrator, it suggests he had reason all the way back in March to try to undercut Flynn. And then, in November, when he had chance to help Flynn out of his legal woes in November, he reportedly did not do so.

    It still never pays to bet against the legal skills of Abbe Lowell. Jared is still likely to skate.

    From Marcy’s twitter feed:

    CNN’s stakeout journalism has been one of the most reliable measures of what Mueller’s is doing.

    From Andrew Prokop: “CNN saw Zainab Ahmad and Michael Dreeben return in car to SCO office shortly after mystery grand jury witness arguments wrapped.”

    * * *

    Given the news that Zainab Ahmad appears to have been at the courthouse w/Dreeben, note that 1) her work is that which has been last visible 2) we haven’t seen Middle Eastern graft charged yet 3) she’s an Arabic speaker, expert in overseas stuff.

    * * *

    So just for spitballing sake: What witness would 1) be involved in the Middle Eastern graft part of this investigation 2) have some claim (attorney-client, journalist, Executive privilege, maybe?) that would be credibly reviewed by Appeals panel?

    Sounds like Robert Mueller & Co. might be willing to take your bet about Abbe Lowell, Marcy.

      • MattyG says:

        ah… the “Dome Of Silence” he was arranging with Kislyac in the Russian Consulate to get around meddlesome US counter intelligence eavedroppers. If that’s what this is all about the case is finally moving to the heart of the matter…

  4. Naomi says:

    “I mean, who better to ask, lol?”

    Mueller-  as he’s been watching the Jack Abramoff and Stone Manafort Black sleeze since they started College Republicans.   I’ll wager Marcy’s time lines introduce Rohrabacher, Tom Delay and all the usual…      the lol will be when Mueller shows us he was “aware” long ago, and he fills in the new generation of swamp creatures.

  5. David Karson says:

    I am not  a lawyer, but from my understanding is when negotiating a plea deal, when you and your lawyer, after numerous conversations with the government, agree to hold a proffer session. You and your lawyer sit down with the prosecutors in  a conference room and you agree to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth to all of their questions. Usually takes a full day. They agree not to use that info you provided against you. Also called “Queen for a Day”.

    • new-radical says:

      Five proffer sessions – then I do not understand the system at all. Like DK I thought you had one “Queen for a Day” to convince the Feds that you had enough bad news for them to offer you something. They seem to offer different things – Weisselberg, Peker, Cohn, Flynn?

      And EW’s comment about Abbe Lowell is truly scary. There is only one set of laws, they should be decipherable by most and clearly by lawyers, or ‘justice’ is truly only available to the power-elites. This is the starting point where the whole concept of justice breaks down. So how can one lawyer be so much better (and read expensive) than another, that his client will ‘skate’.

      • Alan says:

        A proffer session is a negotiation between the prosecutor and the defense.  It can take multiple sessions to reach an agreement.  There can be as many proffer sessions as the prosecutor and defense are willing to entertain.  Sometimes it results in an agreement (like Flynn), sometimes it doesn’t (like Jerome Corsi).

      • bmaz says:

        This is exactly NOT correct. And if you do this, as you have done, it it is obvious. Sorry, but your vignette is NOT how it works. And, please, do not falsely put forward to people here that it is. This is all WAY more complex and different than you are falsely expounding. You have no idea what you are talking about, and do not pretend you do.

      • BobCon says:

        I understand where you’re coming from regarding the advantages a rich person can get from top quality legal representation, when a working class person is sometimes lucky to get any real representation at all.

        I think it’s worth noting, though, that one of the things an Abbe Lowell may do is go to his client and tell them that it’s time to cooperate with the prosecutors, and here is the information they should share to get the best deal….

  6. Strawberry Fields says:

    My speculation, I think we will see a Jared Kushner Chief of Staff because I would guess John Kelly told the Mueller team the truth on Trumps obstruction efforts (order to fire Mueller) which is why he was iced out… and now they would prefer someone comfortable lying to the investigators if a similiar situation comes up again.

  7. pdaly says:

    I’m curious about the Prettyman lockdown. I assume that type of order can be made by Mueller’s team or by the courtroom judges, but I doubt the average citizen challenging a grand jury subpoena could demand and receive a total lockdown before appearing in court.  So does the secrecy and protection from the prying eyes of the press corp suggest the issue involves a top White House official? Vice President maybe?

    • Peterr says:

      You have to be able to make a case to the judge that there’d be some damage if the identify of the party got out — and not just “it would be embarrassing to me.”Among the reasons why a request would be granted would be to protect ongoing investigations, national security concerns, or to protect the life of the witness (such as an informant against a drug kingpin).

      • Trip says:

        Yep. These ideas actually made me worried that a journalist would report on it, if they found who was involved.

      • pseudonymous in nc says:

        My wild-arse guess is that it’s a foreign national with some kind of governmental status and that the appellant kerfuffle is about the intersection of diplomatic / consular immunity and GJ subpoenas, which in some cases depends upon the precise designation of the official and whether the matters in question are “official acts”. That’d be as good a reason as any to clear the floor.

        • Eureka says:

          I’ve been stunned puzzling for several minutes now over this very interesting possibility.  Never thought of that angle.

  8. Trip says:

    It’s just so appropriate that the National Enquirer was involved in this. No other publication quite represents the depth of Trumpworld. The guy from TMZ, Levin, was carrying  Trump water too. And another guy from TMZ had a racket with Davidson (sp?, I think he was Stormy Daniels’ first attorney and also the other lawyer who helped catch and kill stories with Pecker).


    • Jenny says:

      Agree “appropriate the National Enquirer was involved” representing Trumpworld.  Goes along with the script. “It’s not personal, it’s strictly business.”  Michael Corleone, The Godfather

      Pecker has been friends with Trump since 1998.  Twenty years of files/stories about Trump and his family.  All in the Family – manipulative, maniacal and mendacious.

      • Trip says:

        I read an article, I don’t recall where, but apparently Pecker had a deal with Schwarzenegger too. They helped to get him elected and hid his skeletons.

        This is like the Stupid Godfather. Derp Godfather.

  9. Peterr says:

    Something tells me that there’s a staffer at SCO who is looking again at Jared’s original SF-86 (the standard security clearance form) and comparing it with his second SF-86, and comparing that with the third SF-86. Given what Jared has said about the need to revise the form and also what the SCO has learned over the last year, I suspect there may be new insights to be gleaned there that were not immediately apparent.

  10. Ollie says:

    George Papadopoulos
    ‏ @GeorgePapa19
    1h1 hour ago

    It is true. I will be running for Congress in 2020, and I will win. Stay tuned.
    2,272 replies 549 retweets 1,829 likes”

    Seriously? Just found on my twitter feed. This is ‘figures’ w/that idiot. Those are some really big balls, lol

    • Texas Dem says:

      Personally, I don’t think being completely ignorant of your own limitations should qualify as “balls.”


      Although… the more I think about it, the more I’m forced to admit that there may be a relationship there.   Sigh.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Balls implies courage, competence and drive in the face of difficult odds.

      I don’t see that as part of Papa’s make-up.  He is a foolish man, but not courageous one.  He overestimates his expertise, experience, and the reasons why patrons might support him.

      That he would announce his intention to run for national elective office having just served a prison term demonstrates that his negative learning curve, his lack of self-knowledge, and his hubris rival Trump’s.  Anyone who votes for him deserves what they get.

      The mobster Papadopoulos most resembles is not Michael Corleone or Tom Hagen. It is ‘Fredo.

      • Fran of the North says:

        Which family member takes him for a rowboat ride? Son-In-Law that can solve mideast peace, bring business efficiency to government, and prison reform among other duties?

        Oh yea, I forgot that he’s responsible for press relations and secure communications.

    • P J Evans says:

      He seems to have missed the fact that Orange County voted D this year, and there’s no reason to think that’s going to change soon.

      • BobCon says:

        There have been suggestions that the just announced crackdown on Vietnamese immigrants who came post-war is in retaliation for Orange County going blue this year. So maybe the GOP is trying to put their thumb on the scale. If that is true, I’m sure it will backfire. (I’d be inclined to say it’s nothing more than the usual racist xenophobia, though.)

  11. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Mickey Cohen has a lot of problems. Being too loyal is not one of them.

    Being willing to commit crimes for the boss and being willing to work for a boss that demands them are his chief problems.

  12. Eureka says:

    Perhaps this week is a pivot point into Javanka’s early investigable deeds, seemingly on separate tracks.  New from ProPublica re:  Ivanka’s ~ mediative? role in price-setting for inauguration Trump hotel stay(s):

    If the Trump hotel charged more than the going rate for the venues, it could violate tax law. The inaugural committee’s payments to the Trump Organization and Ivanka Trump’s role have not been previously reported or disclosed in public filings.

    (emphasis added)


    Around the middle of the month, with Inauguration Day scarcely a month away, Ivanka Trump was asked to help resolve a dispute between inaugural planners and her family’s Washington hotel, according to emails.

    The problem: Organizers thought the hotel was charging too much money.

    Emails show that Ivanka Trump connected Gates with Mickael Damelincourt, managing director of the hotel. Damelincourt responded with a new rate of $175,000 per day for use of the Presidential Ballroom and meeting rooms, offering a $700,000 charge for four days of use.

    It is not clear what the earlier price was, but Damelincourt’s revised rate did not satisfy one of the lead organizers of the inauguration, Stephanie Winston Wolkoff.


    “I wanted to follow up on our conversation and express my concern,” Wolkoff wrote in the December email.

    “These events are in PE’s [the president-elect’s] honor at his hotel and one of them is for family and close friends. Please take into consideration that when this is audited it will become public knowledge,” she wrote, noting that other locations would be provided to the inaugural committee for free.

  13. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Among the laundry list of items broadcast by the MSM that need correcting is the meme that the early problems in the Trump administration are owing to inexperience and inadequate staffing. Those descriptions are true, they are also beside the point.

    The Trump administration’s problems then are much the same that they have now: Incompetence explains much more than does inexperience, which implies a learning curve that Donald Trump clearly does not have.

    Donald Trump himself explains more. He has a total disregard for process and the law. He picks people with the same attitude and who, like Trump, treat government like a piggy bank to be raided.

    The poor staffing and poor choices are partly intentional. Trump does not want many posts filled – especially regulatory ones and those in agencies that might investigate him or his cronies. The list goes on, but few items on it relate to inexperience.

    • hester says:

      The poor staffing and poor choices are partly intentional.

      Entirely intentional I would submit.  He requires greedy, unscrupulous law-breaking sycophants whom he can (and will) blame, when the sh*t hits the fan.

    • P J Evans says:

      The inexperience is Himself’s lack of actual experience – someone else has always handled the critical stuff for him. His experience is all in micromanaging everything and everyone into the ground while throwing tantrums everywhere like a very small child.

  14. earlofhuntingdon says:

    The language-challenged Donald Trump has appointed Mulvaney as his “Acting Chief of Staff.”

    Whomever wanted the qualification, Trump or Mulvaney, seems unaware that all COS are acting.  The job is not subject to Senate approval, it is subject to the daily whim of the president.

    Regardless of the “acting” description, Mulvaney will be on the hook for anything and everything he does for an addled, irrational guy for whom the legal noose looms larger day-by-day.

    • Eureka says:

      I’m glad you pointed this out- I had thought so and it was irritating me.

      Of course I am also wondering what is the Shine-y purpose of this -cough- ‘designation?’

    • Trip says:

      Hahaha, maybe this is why, Trump announced it on twitter, his aide had no idea:

      he didn’t get a statement out quickly enough declining the honor, is the important thing

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Mulvaney is a heartless, arch-conservative asshole, but not the fastest sprinter on the team.  He will regret not having tweeted faster than the president, to turn down the honor before Trump bestowed it on him.

        • Jenny says:

          Mulvaney will fit right in with the greedy Fear-monger in Chief.  Seven months ago he said, “We had a hierarchy in my office in Congress, if you were a lobbyist who never gave us money, I didn’t talk to you.  If you were a lobbyist who gave us money, I might talk to you.”

    • BobCon says:

      I am sure Mulvaney insisted on the Acting piece, alhough you’re right that it’s irrelevant.

      He’s in for a well deserved horror show. As US Rep and head of OMB and CFPB, he has had plenty of opportunities to delegate and shirk responsibility.

      There is nowhere to hide as COS. Trump will be screaming at him for everything from bad headlines to missing ketchup. Meanwhile he is going to be taking calls from Tom Cotton insisting that Trump needs to spend the weekend in a fishing camp in the Ozarks or else he’ll sign off on an investigation of Melania’s travel budget. Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

      • Drew says:

        So will Mulvaney get separate salaries for each of the three jobs that he will be in? Is that a rationale for being “Acting” in two of them?

      • Jenny says:

        BobCon, your line “Trump will be screaming at him for everything from bad headlines to missing ketchup,” made me LOL.

        Saw this quote from Mulvaney, “When you grow up in a household were mom would keep extra ketchup packets from McDonald’s and keep them in a drawer just in case there came a day when you couldn’t afford ketchup anymore, that gets ingrained in you.”

        Perhaps Mulvaney will be sharing his ketchup inheritance with Trump to keep things balanced in the WH.

    • alaura says:

      So I’m wondering if we’ll see whitaker going for Senate approval because no one will want to step in as Attorney General, either.

    • Drew says:

      “for whom the legal noose looms larger day-by-day” 

      Until the day when that noose gets smaller and smaller as it tightens around his neck.

  15. Jockobadger says:

    What a minefield.  ACOS Mulvaney’ll have to be thinking constantly that with every task/act, he might be dipping a toe in something illegal that could bite or bankrupt him later.

    Hit the support button – pp.  Thanks much.

    • P J Evans says:

      It’s way too late for that. He’s hella corrupt already. (As a congressman, he made it clear that lobbyists would only get a shot at seeing him if they donated.)

    • Eureka says:

      Walker held an event in Green Bay, Wisconsin, on Friday afternoon to announce he’ll sign GOP-pushed legislation that will strip many of the powers of incoming Democrats Governor-elect Tony Evers and Attorney General-elect Josh Kaul.

      …but Walker’s argument is that it’s not the big deal some are cracking it up to be. And during the event on Friday, he tried to make that point with the help of a Venn diagram that lists a number of “powers” Walker and Evers will purportedly share, like “VETO AUTHORITY” and “POWERFUL CHIEF EXECUTIVE.”

      There’s just one problem — Walker doesn’t seem to understand how Venn diagrams work. Venn diagrams illustrate commonality between two sets of things that are different. So if the powers Walker and Evers share are really the same, there’d be no need for a Venn diagram at all. The powers could be listed on a single circle.

      Alas, it is not the case that Evers will enjoy the same powers as Walker.

      (emphasis added)

  16. getouttahere says:

    Walker’s asshole-ness has always been underrated. But like the putz prez, the tragedy is how much damage these assholes have done.

    • alaura says:

      Scott Walker has no brain, just a tiny implant in his ear to receive directions from the Koch Brothers.
      The best way to understand what he does is to add “for the Koch Brothers” to the end of every sentence.
      Same with Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania.

  17. Trip says:

    emptywheel‏ @emptywheel

    Folks: An unsealed transcript released the other day made it clear she has made several such trips. The only thing that’s noteworthy here is that it’s a Friday motion re DC grand jury.

    Spencer Hsu‏ @hsu_spencer

    NEW U.S. prosecutors on Friday asked a federal judge for permission to move Maria Butina from jail, including potentially to testify before a grand jury, in a sealed filing apparently made public by mistake.

    • dude says:

      As to Pence–more particularly, his role as VP:  I thought the whole idea of having a VP was to have someone on the bench, ready to go, to take the reins of office should the President be indisposed. For that reason, I would think Pence would be read-in to everything Trump is briefed on whether Trump listens or understands briefings or not.  So why wouldn’t he be hip deep in a lot of this shady and illegal stuff?  And if he were shut out of things, wouldn’t a reasonable VP have a log of meetings where he was not invited, or a record of his own limited briefings. If the time comes he is presented as a substitute for Trump, he cannot expect everyone to accept his word–“they didn’t tell me about that”, “they told me something else”.  And who, after the awful mess Trump has created, is actually capable of reading Pence in to things he may have been previously denied?  This is no way to run a Vice-Presidency.

  18. Trip says:

    Since this is a page about a gossip rag, remember when comedian Hannibal Buress outed Bill Cosby? This comedian and former staffer of The Apprentice joked (?) that Trump crushed and snorted Adderall on the show. Tom Arnold (the most stable and credible witness ever /s) said that it was true.

    Staffer of ‘The Apprentice’ claims Trump was a ‘speed freak’ who would crush up Adderall and snort it

    It might explain a few things, like marathon tweeting covfefes and why Trump loved the VA Doctor Feelgood so much before he was dumped. But it might just be a rumor you’d find in Pecker’s publication.

  19. Marinela says:

    Anybody understands the reason Flynn was fired?

    Also, deplorable Sebastian Gorka was suggesting Trump could pardon Flynn and he will make a great chief of stuff.

    You have Trump firing Flynn for unknown reason, to me at least.

    Reports that Flynn fully cooperated, but Trump doesn’t attack Flynn.

    Then Flynn could potentially implicate Kushner for back channels, but then Gorka goes on suggesting he would make a great cos, when a cos would require Kushner approval.

    Strange …

    • Alan says:

      I can’t see Trump naming a Mueller-mole as COS.  I don’t see an end date in Flynn’s cooperation agreement, so as soon as Flynn stops reporting back to the Special Counsel, he would be in breach of that agreement.  And while a pardon might relieve Flynn of any consequences of breaching the agreement, Flynn turned once, so what’s going to stop him from doing it again.  The bottom line is that Flynn lacks the #1 attribute Trump looks for in the people he appoints: blind loyalty to Trump.

Comments are closed.