Monkey wrench

Written by

Ophelia Benson

in

They never talk. They talked.

https://twitter.com/AdamSerwer/status/1086424301765574661

In other words they’re saying they didn’t leak anything?

Comments

8 responses to “Monkey wrench”

  1. Skeletor Avatar
    Skeletor

    I think that’s a strained interpretation. The most straightforward interpretation is they’re saying the Buzzfeed report is wrong, that they have not been given evidence that Trump directed Cohen to lie to Congress.

    There seemed to be a consensus forming on Twitter that this was either the end of Trump or the end of Buzzfeed News’ credibility. Sadly, it looks like the latter.

  2. Screechy Monkey Avatar
    Screechy Monkey

    I’d slow my roll if I were you, Skeletor. That denial is fairly cryptic; it’s not entirely clear what parts of the account the Special Counsel’s Office disputes, but it appears to be fairly limited.

    Start with the Buzzfeed report:

    Now the two sources have told BuzzFeed News that Cohen also told the special counsel that after the election, the president personally instructed him to lie — by claiming that negotiations ended months earlier than they actually did — in order to obscure Trump’s involvement.

    The special counsel’s office learned about Trump’s directive for Cohen to lie to Congress through interviews with multiple witnesses from the Trump Organization and internal company emails, text messages, and a cache of other documents. Cohen then acknowledged those instructions during his interviews with that office.

    Now note the wording of the SCO’s denial:

    BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the Special Counsel’s Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office. . are not accurate

    The first part appears to mean “we didn’t say that.” That is, as Ophelia notes, consistent with merely being a statement that “we didn’t leak that,” not “we said something different and you got it wrong.” As to the second part, that could mean “no, we don’t have any of that evidence,” or “yes, we have evidence generally but it doesn’t support all of your specifics, e.g. Trump didn’t tell Cohen “directly” to lie, it was relayed through middlemen, or “that evidence didn’t come from the Trump Organization,” or “WE didn’t learn that way.”

    One useful point to keep in mind: the SCO isn’t the only office investigating Cohen and the Trump Organization. The office of the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of NY has been running its own investigation on tax and other issues. And while Mueller’s team is notoriously tight-lipped, SDNY’s reputation is…. somewhat different.

    So this could be as little as, “fuck you, we’re not responsible for this leak.” I suspect it’s a little more than that, and the story is inaccurate in some detail, but that the gist of it — that prosecutors have testimony and documents to show Trump suborned perjury — is true. Note what the SCO’s statement doesn’t say: there’s nothing in there that says that Trump didn’t encourage Cohen to lie, or that they don’t have evidence of it.

    And in fact, it was fairly heavily implied in the SCO’s sentencing memorandum re Cohen that they believe that Cohen lied to Congress at Trump’s behest.

  3. Karellen Avatar
    Karellen

    There’s a scene from one Yes, (Prime?) Minister episode, which I cannot find a clip of from YouTube (darn!) where Hacker, Sir Humphrey and Bernard are discussing this, and I think it’s Bernard who points out that it’s one on those irregular verbs “I give confidential press briefings; you leak; he has just been arrested under section 3.5 of the official secrets act.”

  4. Holms Avatar
    Holms

    I think the only plain thing about the announcement is that they are taking pains to avoid giving away which specific thing(s) the Buzzfeed article misstated. We will have to wait and see what the inaccuracy was, probably only when the final report is released.

  5. What a Maroon Avatar
    What a Maroon

    Reminds me of the scene in All the President’s Men (book and movie) where Woodstein report that someone testified that Haldeman was controlling the slush fund. Turns out that the story was wrong but only because no such testimony had been made at that point. Nixon’s people were able to make some hay out of it at the time, but it didn’t save him.

    I couldn’t find the actual clip where they discover their mistake, but here’s the aftermath:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=FEdL1_zOyz4

  6. Seth Avatar
    Seth

    I’m only surprised that people were willing to extend Buzzfeed any credibility for them to ruin in the first place.

  7. Ophelia Benson Avatar
    Ophelia Benson

    Skeletor @ 1…Wow. It’s almost as if you don’t recognize careful, minimal wording even when it’s right in front of you. Funny how that doesn’t surprise me.

  8. Screechy Monkey Avatar
    Screechy Monkey

    What a Maroon,

    Yeah, I’ve seen that comparison made a lot today and yesterday, and it may prove to be apt. In fact, Sloane confirmed that he would have testified that Haldeman was one of the five who controlled the slush fund, but it’s just that he wasn’t asked that question — and that was the only real inaccuracy in the story.

More posts