Sunday Rundown: Jake Tapper Literally Decapitates Carter Page
We begin our Sunday Rundown with former Trump foreign policy adviser and creepy inappropriate smiler Carter Page on CNN's "State of the Union" with Jake Tapper:
Honestly, Carter, stop smiling. It's seriously is not helping....
After the release of those 400+ pages of FISA application for the surveillance of Carter Page, Page did the idiotic thing -- as he has done before -- and went on TV again to attempt to put out a fire with a can of gasoline. Jake Tapper immediately got to the heart of the matter.
TAPPER: But you -- so you have advised the Kremlin in the past? That was 2013, that G20 meeting, I believe.
PAGE: Look, it was a -- there were experts from around the world talking about energy issues. And I was one of countless company, myself and a lot of academics and businesspeople who were involved in these various discussions sessions. But it was nothing.
TAPPER: But you did advise the Kremlin? I mean, I'm just -- I just want to make it clear. You did advise the Kremlin back in 2013 or 2012, somewhere in there?
PAGE: Jake, that's -- it's really spin. I mean, I -- I sat in on some meetings. But, you know, to call me an adviser, I think, is -- is way over the -- over the top.
TAPPER: Except, in a 2013 letter, you wrote that -- it says -- quote -- "Over the past half-year, I have had the privilege to serve as an informal adviser to the staff of the Kremlin in preparation for the presidency of the G20 next month, where energy issues will be a prominent point on the agenda." That's August 2013. That's yourself calling yourself an informal adviser to the Kremlin.
PAGE: You know, informal, having some conversations with people. I mean, this is really nothing and just an attempt to distract from the real crimes that are shown in this misleading document.
Witness for yourself and remember THIS was one of those "best people" Trump hired.
After it was revealed last week that there are tapes of Cohen and Trump discussing paying to shut down a story of him and a Playboy Playmate, Dershowitz first tries to get a "gotcha" moment from Avenatti when he mentions he know that there are more tapes by questioning how he got them:
AVENATTI: Alan, let me say this. All of the information that the FBI seized, that's not under lock and key. The only way that it would be improper for me to have it is if I got it from the FBI or somebody in law enforcement. There's a host of other ways I could have obtained that information. But look, if I'm wrong...
DERSHOWITZ: How? How?
AVENATTI: Well, I could have received it from Michael Cohen. I could have received it from one of Michael Cohen's counsel. I could have received it from others. There's a host of ways I could have obtained it. But look, Alan, here's the bottom line. If I'm wrong about it, then why doesn't somebody come forward...
(CROSSTALK FROM DERSHOWITZ)
AVENATTI: Please don't interrupt me. If I'm right about it -- If I'm wrong about it, let somebody come forward and state that I'm wrong.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Have you heard the tape?
DERSHOWITZ: You're missing my point. You're right about it and you shouldn't have the information. And it raises deep questions about how you have access to information that Judge Kimba Wood gave to a judge -- a former judge to investigate in secret because it's potentially lawyer-client privilege.
DERSHOWITZ: You shouldn't have lawyer-client information...
AVENATTI: Alan, Alan, Alan, do you know what Michael Cohen -- Alan, do you know what Michael Cohen has shared with me?
DERSHOWITZ: I don't, but I think...
AVENATTI: Thank you.
DERSHOWITZ: But remember that he is not allowed to cooperate with anybody if there's lawyer-client privileged material. He's not permitted to give you that information even if he would like to if it's lawyer-client. He doesn't own it. It's owned by the client.
STEPHANOPOULOS: As you know, Alan, in terms of this tape, though, the privilege was actually waived by the president's...
Right! Besides the fact that anything discussed that is a criminal violation or advances a crime is not covered either, Alan. You know...like...federal campaign finance violation. Just ask John Edwards. Finally Dershowitz makes a bad argument for why American Media Inc (AMI), parent company of The National Enquirer, should be protected under the First Amendment for essentially working as Trump's personal hush team:
DERSHOWITZ: This raises very serious First Amendment questions. When you start questioning legitimacy, and here's the quote, whether it's legitimate press function, you're really beginning to step on First Amendment rights.
ABRAMS: Well, no, but...
DERSHOWITZ: We know that newspapers buy stories all the time. Once government officials start raising questions about whether a press function is legitimate, that really begins to raise –
ABRAMS: -- the question would be – the question would be was AMI making a deal with the president such that it had nothing to do with actually publishing stories, but instead making a deal to kill stories. That is not a First Amendment press function, and it is a question we have to ask.
To witness what happens when Dershowitz has to debate legal experts outside of Hannity, watch below:
Wonkette is ad-free and supported ENTIRELY by about 3000 readers a month. Want to make it 3001? Yeah you fuckin' do.
Pop Culture observer & Comics fan. Amateur Movie Reviewer. Political Freelance Writer @wonkette. Marine, Husband & Dad. Opinions are mine only.