Rotella Talks With Brian Kilmeade on Mueller Testimony

Brian: Bryan Rotella joins us, attorney, founder and CEO, senior partner of GenCo Legal. Bryan, what is your assessment so far? Thanks for joining us.

Bryan Rotella: Good morning, Brian. Thank you. Well, look, remember Seinfeld with Jerry and George and they were pitching a show that was the show about nothing? From the President’s perspective, this has been testimony about nothing. Looking at it from a legal perspective, Brian, there’s nothing that’s laid a glove on him. That first bit that you just played with regards to Congressman Nadler and getting out that whether Mueller exonerated the President or not, it doesn’t matter. He put it in his report that he found no evidence of any participation by the president or his campaign in conspiring with the Russians to interfere with the 2016 election.

What I think folks forget, and I’ve read the report, all 499 pages of it, is that this report was titled Report on Russia’s Interference with the Presidential Election of 2016. His report said the president didn’t conspire. That should have been the end of the story. What this is and what you were just touching on, and having tried a lot of cases in my life, I actually feel bad for Special Counsel Mueller. He looks like that witness who really didn’t get the briefing, didn’t read his expert review. I find it somewhat challenging and what I’m watching where he has to go back and look for the citations, Brian, instead of being able to master the work and what he did for all these years. I think folks out there are saying, “We paid $25 million for this?”

Brian: They point out that they took 41 million from Manafort and it cost about 40 million, so they broke even, but it’s absolutely true. I feel like I could answer his questions better. No question. When they were coming at him, when Gohmert and Jim Jordan were going at him, I don’t even think he knew where they were coming from.

Bryan Rotella: No. Brian, I think for certain he didn’t know where they were coming from. I think we now know why last night … I’m speculating, I don’t know this, why he wanted his deputy there. Let me tell you. I think they prepped him and when they were prepping him they were realizing that Special Counsel Mueller wasn’t that close to this. I think that what we’re seeing here is he was the figurehead to give legitimacy to this, but he was not in any way in the details.

You know how I also know that it’s something in reading this report, and I won’t be surprised if this doesn’t come up later today, but I just heard one of the congresswomen bringing this up, which is the citations and how many of them were to the Washington Post and yada, yada yada. I found interesting that the whole case on obstruction, Brian, is built on 32 citations to @realDonaldTrump. There is no precedent or history of Twitter being used to cover up a crime. Twitter by its nature is a public, the most public of our social media. I’m interested, if they go down that line of questioning, the way he’s responded this morning, what’s he going to say about why he made that a basis and why he thought that had any credibility?

Brian: Yeah, good point. They want to say he obstructed, Democrats, and Republicans want to say, why didn’t you take some … why didn’t you … why weren’t you even curious what Peter Strzok was up to? Why weren’t you even wondering when you got … When you looked at the content of those text messages that showed a corrupt intent on the investigation, why wouldn’t you try to find out what the insurance plan was? Who’s the one who ordered the deletion of all those other text messages? Who knows what we don’t have right now and if the inspector general able to go back and discover the others. Why did you hire everyone with clear Democratic leanings that have a history with the president’s opponent? He doesn’t want to answer these things where I think that if it was me, I hired people because of the best people. They’ve … To me, they showed me that they’d be able to put their politics aside for the good of the country, but instead he says, “I will not speak to that.” What does that mean?

Bryan Rotella: I agree, Brian. That means that he’s a lawyer who’s lawyered up. I thought that my Congressman here in Florida where I’m based did a great job of talking about, You seem to want to throw everybody in prison from Papadopoulos to Manafort for lying, but what about Christopher Steele? What about the professor there, Mifsud?” Why aren’t these guys … Why didn’t they get followed up upon and what really … Again, if anyone out there is actually read the report, it’s in the first five pages. I’m not asking them to read all 400 plus.

Brian, I know you’ve seen it. He lays out or his team laid out this activity started by Russia back in 2014 with this Internet Research Agency, and then this arm, this GRU of the Russian military all before the president ever gets elected. Before election night, no one is asking him questions, what did you guys find? As a lawyer that tells me what we are on notice as we go into 2020. These guys, there’s no question that they infiltrated our election process. What are we doing to stop it and quite frankly, why didn’t you sit with Obama? Why didn’t you sit with Secretary of State or Foreign Secretary of State, Kerry?

Brian: I hear you.

Bryan Rotella: Where did that go?

Brian: Bryan, thanks so much. Bryan Rotella, offering his instant analysis as the hearings continue.

leave your comment