Chapters
Shownotes Transcript
Have a question or need how-to advice? Just ask Meta AI. Whether you need to summarize your class notes or want to create a recipe with the ingredients you already have in your fridge, Meta AI has the answers. You can also research topics, explore interests, and so much more. It's the most advanced AI at your fingertips. Expand your world with Meta AI. Now on Instagram, WhatsApp, Facebook, and Messenger.
Listener supported. WNYC Studios. This is the New Yorker Radio Hour, a co-production of WNYC Studios and The New Yorker. Welcome to the New Yorker Radio Hour. I'm David Remnick. Seven years ago, Ty Cobb was a partner in a big international law firm, prominent, well-connected. Then he got a phone call. Would he give up his job to go work for the White House for a while?
The client was Donald Trump, and the issue was Russian interference in the 2016 election. Trump and many others were being investigated in a probe headed by Robert Mueller, the former FBI director. In the end, some of Trump's circle were indicted. Some even went to jail. But Trump himself avoided indictment and dismissed the entire thing as a witch hunt. But Ty Cobb went on to call Robert Mueller an American hero and Trump a threat to democracy.
And one of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, "Well, sir, if we don't pay and we're attacked by Russia, will you protect us?" I said, "You didn't pay? You're delinquent?" He said, "Yes. Let's say that happened. No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You got to pay. You got to pay your bills."
Now, once again, Donald Trump's attitude toward Vladimir Putin is in the headlines after his recent remarks about NATO and in the wake of Alexei Navalny's death in a Russian prison. Trump is also facing more than 90 criminal charges. I spoke about all of that last week with Ty Cobb. Right off the bat, because of your involvement in the Russia investigation, I have to ask you this.
about your reaction to the death of Alexei Navalny and maybe even more to the point because of your own experience, Donald Trump's reaction to the death of Alexei Navalny. You know, you don't have, sadly in our day, people throughout history who, you know, put purpose over and principle over safety. Navalny
sort of stands alone in this century, I think, so far as the person who, you know, best and certainly most immediately projects that. I think, you know, he's as much a hero as anybody I can look back in history on and call a hero. Joe Biden acknowledged that
Navalny's heroism, both when he was alive and even more forcefully after he died, and his promising more sanctions, and was pretty unambiguous about it. Donald Trump's reaction was... Oh, no, I'm with you 100%. Yeah, Donald Trump did not condemn Putin at all. In fact, compared Joe Biden to Putin and himself to Alexei Navalny.
He wrote this on Truth Social. The sudden death of Alexei Navalny has made me more and more aware of what is happening in our country. It is a slow, steady progression with crooked, radical left politicians, prosecutors and judges leading us down a path to destruction. This judge, Arthur Engeron, ruled against you for almost half a billion dollars.
It's a lot of it is a form of Navalny. It is a form of communism or fascism. How did you react to that? Whatever whatever device people pick up to try to translate Trump, the focus needs to be analyzing everything he says through his narcissism.
And he can't talk about anybody else favorably for two seconds without turning it, you know, to himself, comparing himself to, you know, Martin Luther King or Navalny or, you know, he only uses heroes, historical heroes to try to glorify himself. Shouldn't surprise anybody because that's what he does in every circumstance. I think what surprises me is how different...
He speaks now than he did in 2016. He was pretty unhinged in 2016, but he at least had people like Kushner and others whispering in his ear about what was important to people. Now he doesn't have even that level of a check. Now, I want to go back in time. You were a very respected lawyer in Washington. You get this phone call.
that you're going to work with Donald Trump. What was your initial reaction? Did you have any qualms about it? And why did you go forward? Did you get a sense that Donald Trump had a respect for the process, for the rule of law? Or did you get the sense that you were in a purely political realm? So his sense was that he was in a purely political realm. And this was a personal attack on him and it was set up by
the FBI, and perhaps others. But my own sense was this was purely legal, at least as it was, at least in Mueller's circumstances. There's been a kind of resurrection of discussion lately, in fact, in recent days, about Donald Trump and his attitude toward Putin, his attitude toward Putin's circle, and
And his comments about, or lack of comments about, Navalny have revived the notion that somehow, and you see it with Nancy Pelosi, that somehow Russia and Putin has something on Donald Trump. How do you react to that?
So taking that predicate first, you know, I don't, there's no evidence of that. And I, I mean, I looked for it for a year. Um, and, um, shame on me if I didn't find it, if it's, if it's really there, uh, I don't think Putin has anything on Trump. Um, but you know, he, he, he, he sort of admires that the power that, uh, Putin has accumulated and he, um, uh,
You know, has much the same style. In fact, I think his takeover of the RNC was very mob-like. You know, he just took it over and, you know, quite likely intends to loot it for his daughter. Well, yeah. Well, well, so putting her in, I think is interesting.
emblematic of the way he views it as, you know, a tool to serve himself. But I think, you know, what the big, the end game there is being able to try to dictate who's going to be a candidate and who's going to get the financial support and also using that financial support for his own liabilities. So I divorced the Russia investigation from anything that Trump has done with Putin. Um,
You know, there was just nothing in the investigation, as the report reflects, frankly, that ties Trump to Putin or Putin even to the attempt to influence. And there's now, thankfully, public evidence.
significant information that undercuts, you know, Brennan and Clapper and any suggestion that Putin preferred Trump to Clinton. But in terms of Trump's affection for Putin... Again, as somebody who's been looking at Russia for an awfully long time and is following it, the notion that
Putin preferred Trump to Clinton is pretty incontrovertible. It comes right from Putin's mouth and from various celebrations in the highest echelons of Yedin Ayyadossiya, the United Russia Party, and all the rest. But let's debate that another time. What accounts for Donald Trump's seeming unwillingness at any point to show any critical mind toward Vladimir Putin?
In my own judgment, I think Trump's fascination with Putin is...
He has what Trump wants, which is total control and adulation and riding the horse with his shirt off. Now, we're never going to see Trump with his shirt off. Well, thank God for small favors. But I do think it's really a function of his narcissism and his admiration for people who have the stature within their sphere that he would like. I'm speaking with the attorney Ty Cobb. More in a moment.
Have a question or need how-to advice? Just ask Meta AI. Whether you need to summarize your class notes or want to create a recipe with the ingredients you already have in your fridge, Meta AI has the answers. You can also research topics, explore interests, and so much more. It's the most advanced AI at your fingertips. Expand your world with Meta AI. Now on Instagram, WhatsApp, Facebook, and Messenger.
We're run in this country via the Democrats by a bunch of childless cat ladies. There's just an army of outraged cat ladies, many of whom actually have children, many of whom also have dogs. Some prominent men have never liked cats or ladies. It's a trope that draws on old anxieties around witches and their cats from the Middle Ages. On this week's On the Media from WNYC. Find On the Media wherever you get your podcasts.
Why have you decided to become much blunter about your assessment of Trump in recent times? Because I think he certainly, post-January 6th, has been exposed as the greatest threat to democracy that we've ever seen. And I'm a citizen, and I grew up in a little town in Kansas. My dad was a naval fighter pilot. I was the oldest of eight kids. And I've spent much of my life in public service, and I've never been one to...
shy away from saying what I mean. Right now, we're looking at a Donald Trump trying to get a second term running ahead in most of the polls. Right. And at the same time, he's facing over 90 felony charges across four criminal cases. Right. A couple of civil cases have already come to their conclusion, sexual assault and defamation, his case about his business in New York City, and that could all leave him about $400 million poorer than
How do you assess this lineup of cases arrayed against Donald Trump? Which are the strongest ones? Which are the weakest? And which are the cases that are the most consequential for the election? The only two cases that I think are consequential are the two federal cases. There's no defense in the classified documents case, particularly given the obstruction and the false affidavits related to it and the fact that he actually...
share those documents willy-nilly with visitors to Mar-a-Lago, including one of his closest advisors who's going to be a witness for the government. So I think he's dead, but he's got the protection of the judge who has basically slowed that case down to the point where there's no chance that it can get to trial before the election. The only case that can get to trial before the election is
is the federal case in D.C. involving Trump's failure to allow the peaceful transfer of power and his attempts to obstruct that. That hinges on whether or not the Supreme Court takes certiorari on the
on the immunity issue. In other words, the court can agree to hear Trump's immunity argument, or they can let the lower court's ruling on immunity stand and let the case go to trial. Right. And if they grant it, I think that dooms that case from getting to trial before the election. If they deny it, then I think it could be tried in
July or late June the problem with the New York case is not that Alvin Bragg ran on trying to get Trump. That's a political problem That's a perception problem, but there are legal legal defects to the way that case was charged We're talking about the case involving stormy Daniels and hush money, right? The misdemeanor that is charged only becomes a felony if you can tie it to an actual felony and the felony they attempt to tie it to is
is a violation of the federal election laws. Now, there's a serious constitutional issue as to whether a state prosecutor can charge federal crimes. And the almost universal consensus is they can't. So I think at the end of this... So that's the weakest of the bunch. Right. That's very weak. And it's going to occupy, you know, a month of, you know, Trump railing against the system in New York and the judges and
and the prosecutors, of which I think we're all tired and familiar. And what happens if he does win the presidency? If he does win the presidency, he'll direct the Justice Department to dismiss both cases. And what ensues from that? And maybe that's a political, sociological question rather than a legal one. If Trump is convicted here, he will be out on an appeal bond. The appeal won't be heard before his death.
His inauguration, should he win, and immediately after inauguration, I'll have it dismissed, and it'll be as though the case has never existed. And just to round things out, the Georgia case, which has its own peculiarities, to say the least. Boy, that's for sure. You know, everybody's got different interests that they can bring to the attention of the judge in advance of trial that I think will delay that well beyond the election. The Georgia case is not something, though, Trump can dismiss.
But I think the general legal consensus, which is only based on policy and not based on any statute or precedent, is that it's likely Trump would be allowed to serve his full term or serve until impeached before that case could be brought. Right. At which point he'd be, you know, 83 or 84 and, you know, who knows what would happen.
Ty Cobb, thank you so much. I really appreciate your time. No, I really enjoyed visiting with you. It was an honor to be with you. Good to see you. Take care. Ty Cobb was special counsel to Donald Trump during the Mueller investigation, and he's an attorney in Washington, D.C. This is the New Yorker Radio Hour, and I'm David Remnick. Thanks for joining us, and see you next time.
The New Yorker Radio Hour is a co-production of WNYC Studios and The New Yorker. Our theme music was composed and performed by Meryl Garbus of Tune Yards with additional music by Louis Mitchell. This episode was produced by Max Balton, Adam Howard, Pallalia, David Krasnow, Jeffrey Masters, and Louis Mitchell, with guidance from Emily Botin and assistance from Michael May, David Gable, and Alejandra Deccan. And we had additional help this week from Rommel Wood.
The New Yorker Radio Hour is supported in part by the Cherena Endowment Fund. Have a question or need how-to advice? Just ask Meta AI. Whether you need to summarize your class notes or want to create a recipe with the ingredients you already have in your fridge, Meta AI has the answers. You can also research topics, explore interests, and so much more. It's the most advanced AI at your fingertips. Expand your world with Meta AI.
Now on Instagram, WhatsApp, Facebook, and Messenger.
