Exclusive: Trump's Kids and Jared Are Indicted at SDNY

A pardon would not be "pre-emptive".

There’s a lot of discussion in the Twittersphere about Donald Trump granting his kids a pre-emptive pardon. This is wrong. The pardon would not be pre-emptive, and Bill Barr would be involved in the corrupt granting of any such pardon. There are already sealed indictments of Ivanka Trump, Eric Trump, Donald Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner at the Southern District of New York. Let’s talk about the details.

One of the most disappointing Congressional exchanges in the Trump years came between Bill Barr and Sen. Richard Blumenthal, over the redacted Mueller cases listed in Appendix D of Mueller’s report.

Blumenthal …and I want to ask you whether you have had any communication on those 12-14 ongoing investigations with anyone in the White House.”

Barr: No.

Blumenthal: I want you to give us an ironclad guarantee

Barr: [interrupting] And I’m not sure about the laundry list of investigations, but I certainly haven’t talked the substance or been directed to do anything on any of the investigations.

Blumenthal: Let me give you a chance to clarify. Have you had any conversations about any of those ongoing investigations, that were spawned or spun off by…

Barr: [interrupting] I don’t recall having any substantive discussions on the investigations.

Blumenthal: Have you had any non-substantive discussion?

Barr: Er - uh - it’s possible that the name of a case was mentioned.

Great work in pinning him down on his perjury, but Senator Blumenthal did not put it to Barr that leaking to Trump cases that might involve family and friends would be obstruction of justice. The admission by Barr came as no surprise to me, as I had exclusively reported that all of Trump’s three eldest children and Jared Kushner were already indicted, under seal, in the Southern District of New York. Let’s delve a little deeper into what sources said then and what recent court filings, and reporting, indicate Trump plans to do about it.

First, sources said that when Mueller went to Bill Barr to give him a ‘preview’ of what the Mueller Report planned to say, there was a stand-up, shouting match between Mueller and Barr. Mueller wanted to indict Donald Trump for obstruction of Justice. But he could not do that on his own; Special Counsel Regulations meant he had to get the AG’s permission first. Barr refused permission, and tried to draw Mueller into a trap; “give me what you got, and I’ll decide”. Rather than let Barr turn him down, Mueller refused to make a decision so that later prosecutors could do it. Famously, he confirmed this in his later testimony:

"Could you charge the president with a crime after he left office?" Buck asked.  

Mueller responded, "yes."

Buck asked again, "You could charge the President of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office," to which Mueller responded again, "yes."

But Barr did not hold all the cards. Mueller could have gone public, he could have resigned over Barr obstructing his investigation, he could have done any number of things. He also told Barr that he wanted to indict all three of Trump’s children - Eric, Don Jr, Ivanka - and Jared Kushner. After hours of shouting, a sort of deal was reached; the prosecutions of all three Trump kids, and Jared, were referred out to the Southern District of New York.

What my sources did not tell me: the offenses each of the four were charged with, if any of them were charged together with each other, and so forth.

What came next? Well, Barr’s whitewashing letter misrepresented Mueller’s investigation, according to Mueller. And, according to Bill Barr himself, Barr deliberately told Donald Trump “the name” of “a case” and then lied in his testimony that he could not recall anything else.

Clearly, Barr’s plan was for Trump to simply pardon his children and Jared Kushner and frame it as a “pre-emptive” pardon. He also hoped to just get rid of the indictments at the Southern District of New York. So, Barr tried to fire Geoffrey Berman, in charge of prosecutions at SDNY, and was so desperate to get rid of Berman that he lied that Berman had resigned, leading to one of the strangest-ever exchanges on social media, as SDNY denied it in public. This was about Jared, Ivanka, Eric, and Don Jr.

How do we know it was not about Halkbank? Bill Barr famously pressured Geoffrey Berman to drop his investigation into, and prosecution of, the Turkish bank. The New York Times reported on this, once again, whether by intent or not, deflecting the reader away from the true story. The dismissal of Berman was not about Halkbank because Berman had already won that tussle; Halkbank was prosecuted. The Times story rather disgracefully takes its queue here directly from Bill Barr, and they admit doing so; the piece ends:

In June, eight months after the indictment was returned, Mr. Trump fired Mr. Berman. Justice Department officials cited his handling of the Halkbank matter, including his blocking of the proposed global settlement, as a key reason for his removal.

There is nothing further to the story, leaving the reader with the impression that that’s the answer - Barr wanted Berman fired for past defiance. And yet, The Times should have known that this was false. Berman’s limited testimony talks about his statement calling out Barr’s lie being made public in order to protect ongoing, current and important investigations. He refuses to answer one friendly question:

Because it would require talking about ongoing cases of the Southern District of New York that I will not comment on. (emphasis mine)

This language clearly refers to specific, individual cases, not to all cases in general. And without boring the reader, Berman clearly makes that point over and over again, saying that his refusal to quit was “about the cases”, that he only trusted Audrey Strauss to prosecute those cases.

Bill Barr himself acknowledged and confirmed Berman’s take. His letter to Berman, after being called out as a liar, reeked of fear.

Your statement also wrongly implies that your continued tenure in the office is necessary to ensure that cases now pending in the Southern District of New York are handled appropriately. This is obviously false. I fully expect that the office will continue to handle all cases in the normal course, and pursuant to the Derpartment’s applicable standards, policies, and guidance.

Barr then did something unusual. He publicly stated that attempts to interfere should be referred to Michael Horowitz, the DOJ’s Inspector General. But why should there be any attempt to interfere, if, as the New York Times’ spurious report on Halkbank suggested, this firing was about an indictment that had already taken place? We do not know, but may fairly infer, that Berman threatened Barr with something along the lines of personal criminal consequences, such as referring him to the FBI for obstruction of justice in the matter of Donald Trump’s kids and son-in-law. Barr publicly said “report me to Horowitz” not out of integrity - clearly - but as a public defense to private accusations of criminal behavior.

Meanwhile, the press that continues to carry Donald Trump’s water would have you pay attention to the shiny object of Ivanka Trump, who clearly knows she is indicted under seal, making a public fuss about a civil action on tax evasion. For a Presidency that is known to deal by Twitter, this is an invitation to the press to cry “oh, it’s so natural that Trump would “preemptively” pardon his kids!” Defensive major media pieces about “pre-emptive pardons” and tweets by Ezra Cohen-Watnick’s lawyers are out there suggesting such a pardon wouldn’t obstruct justice by pardoning a co-conspirator - in this case, four co-conspirators - it would merely be “pre-emptive” you know, just in case of future charges. And still, our supine White House press corps does not ask either Barr or Trump - why did Bill Barr tell you “the name of a case” that Mueller passed out for indictment? Why that case? Why did Barr lie at first when asked if he told you anything?

What was the name of the case?

My next piece will explore how the bribes-for-pardons document relates to Trump’s plans to pardon the sealed indictments on his kids and son-in-law - before they can ever be unsealed - and Bill Barr’s criminal liability in helping to obstruct justice. Here’s a taster: “currently” is doing a lot of heavy lifting the DOJ statement that 'no government official is currently a subject or a target” of the bribes-for-pardons probe.