Downloaded from YTS.BZ
Hi, my name is Stormy Daniels,
and I'm sure you've heard of me by now.
Official YIFY movies site: YTS.BZ
I'll be narrating and you'll see me
popping up in this film from time to time.
You may have heard about my recent
courtroom appearance in a case
called The People of New York versus Donald J. Trump.
You see, Trump lied about our sexual encounter.
And then covered it up by falsifying business records.
In doing so, he unlawfully influenced
the 2016 presidential election.
On May 30th, 2024, Donald Trump was
convicted of committing 34 felonies.
He's the first U.S. president
ever convicted of a felony
and not just 1, 34.
Go big or go home, right?
Justice can be a real bitch.
Right now, I want to tell you how Vladimir Putin
also interfered in the 2016 election,
and how Donald Trump keeps talking
about a little something called
'golden showers'.
So come for the water sports and stay for the collusion.
(lounge music)
And the whole Russia investigation?
It was all phony shit.
Okay, all phony stuff.
I'm not into golden showers!
Yes, he actually said this.
Wait, what? Nobody even asked him.
Not recently.
Then why is his hair goldenrod?
You know the great thing,
our great first lady -
That one, she said.
I don't believe that one!
Yes, he actually said this.
So Melania believes all the others?
Like what?
Like the ones about about a goat.
Goat?
Just a rumor.
So to recap, in conclusion,
and furthermore, I'm not into golden showers
and even Melania didn't believe that one.
So anyway, thanks for coming tonight.
I love you people.
And don't forget to empty your wallets on the way out.
So was that a one-off?
Not exactly.
And the phony Steele dossier?
It was all phony.
How'd you like to be me and go home
and explain that one to my wife?
Darling, it wasn't true.
I swear it wasn't.
Remember that one with the hookers from Russia.
Russia, Russia, Russia?
How about going home to my wife on the shower,
you know? The golden shower they called it.
And I had to explain that to our great first lady.
This is the greatest witch hunt.
It started with Russia, Russia, Russia. Remember that?
He was with four hookers.
You think that was good that night to go up and tell my wife
it's not true darling, I love you very much.
It's not true!
Four hookers. That's interesting
since the rumor never mentioned any number.
Trump does protest too much.
He keeps bringing up the pee pee tape.
(laughs)
When other people do stop talking
about it, he brings it up again.
The rumor is that there's actual
video evidence that this happened.
So... I've not seen the video, but I'd watch it.
(jaunty music)
In 2016, Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton
to win the White House.
The Russians interfered in that election
on behalf of their favored candidate,
Donald Trump.
In the phony Steele dossier.
It was all phony.
The Steele dossier was unvetted
opposition research compiled in 2016,
and it included explosive reports
about Donald Trump and the Russians.
And the allegation of a salacious videotape.
Trump claims the investigation into his campaign's
many connections to Russia was sparked by the Steele dossier.
What do you say we fact-check that?
The idea that the Russia investigation
was based on the Steele dossier is just categorically false.
There's been much talk about a man named Christopher Steele
and a research product that he put together,
something that's been called opposition research
that happens all the time at high
levels when there's an election.
People, candidates looking for so-called dirt,
looking to understand vulnerabilities
of the opposition candidate.
So Chris Steele is a former British intelligence officer.
He was respected.
He was a Russian specialist
within the British intelligence services.
And that Steele put things
in his research product that were not substantiated
or confirmed or accurate, has been used by Donald Trump
and his supporters to say that therefore, the FBI investigation
that predicated the special counsel
investigation, all has to get thrown out.
And what's been found is the contrary.
It is a fallacy to say that if you successfully attack
the Christopher Steele dossier,
you somehow have successfully attacked
the predication for the FBI
investigation and then the subsequent
special counsel investigation.
The truth is that that's not what
led to those investigations.
So the investigation was opened
at the end of July, based on this
tip from a friendly foreign nation.
Later in mid-September, I think
19th, if memory serves correctly,
we received a body of information, a series of reports
that had been generated by an
individual named Christopher Steele.
Now, again, the important fact is that's
not what generated the investigation.
The investigation was up and running.
The bulk of Mueller's
efforts and prosecutions made no use
of the Steele dossier whatsoever.
This is somebody
that had had an established
relationship and had and was respected.
So having that information come in
again, it's a very reasonable thing,
I think, for the FBI to take a look at and say, all right,
you're providing this information.
We'll take a look at it and we'll try and figure out
whether or not it's accurate and actionable or not.
My opinion on the Steele dossier is
that it's valuable as raw intelligence,
just as if we obtained unverified information
about a terrorist group, for example,
from sources in a terrorist cell.
We'd want the FBI and the intelligence
community to follow up to see
what is actually true or not,
what might be borne out and provide leads.
And I think that that's what the FBI did with that information.
In January of 2017, BuzzFeed
published the Steele dossier online.
(tense music)
This is the greatest witch hunt.
It started with Russia, Russia, Russia.
Remember that?
All counterintelligence investigations
require what's called predication.
And what that means is that there
have to be articulable facts
that there is a threat to national security.
And the predication in the case of the Russia investigation
was intelligence provided to the United States by Australia,
indicating that Russia might be
trying to use weaponized information
in order to interfere in the 2016 election.
In the midst of all that activity,
a friendly foreign government saw,
and certainly former President Trump, then
candidate Trump, was making statements
pointing to this activity and talking about all the things
that were being disclosed through these leaks.
And in the midst of all this activity,
in late July, a friendly foreign nation
recalled a meeting that they had had earlier in the spring
with a Trump campaign adviser
a named campaign adviser with that,
and whose name was George Papadopoulos,
and that Papadopoulos had told
this representative of a friendly foreign nation
that the Trump campaign had received an
offer of assistance from the Russians,
saying that they had information that would be damaging to both
then President Obama and Hillary Clinton, and that they offered
to release it in a way that would help the Trump campaign.
And so at the time, in the early spring,
they didn't make much of that statement,
didn't know whether or not it was a boast or not.
But then when that actually started happening,
when this information that was
helpful to Trump was being released
and Trump was picking it up and amplifying it, they recalled
and put two and two together and said,
well, wait a minute, what is going on
now is exactly what Papadopoulos sort
of told us about earlier in the spring.
The case that was open, we called Crossfire Hurricane
and I'm a big Rolling Stones fan,
and so I was listening to Jumpin' Jack Flash at the time.
♪ I was born in a crossfire hurricane ♪
And that was, you know, kind of in the background,
I was trying to think about what to
name the case, and it seemed like
I didn't understand how appropriate
it would really end up being.
But that was just kind of a spur
of the moment naming of the case.
And again, the case was opened, not on just George Papadopoulos,
but broadly on the suggestion, because Papadopoulos didn't say
I received this information.
He said somebody on the campaign had.
So the question was, you know, it's what's called that,
you know, an unknown subject. We don't know one, if that's true,
but you know, it
given that Papadopoulos was a named
advisor to Trump, you know, Trump himself
named him when he was asked, hey, you
know who's on your foreign policy team?
Trump identified Papadopoulos.
This wasn't despite Trump's later statement
that, you know, Papadopoulos was some coffee boy.
The fact of the matter was, when asked
by, I think, the Washington Post,
who is your foreign policy team?
Trump reeled off a bunch of names,
which included George Papadopoulos.
If you want, I could give you some of the names.
I would be delighted.
George Papadopoulos.
He's an oil and energy consultant.
Excellent guy.
So opening the case, opening Crossfire Hurricane,
the goal of that investigation
was to figure out okay, did in fact, this offer take place?
Who received that offer?
And then, as importantly, if they heard that offer,
did anybody on the campaign then take action
to follow up on that offer of assistance?
A lot of people, you know, in the sort of
popular discussion, certainly from
opponents of the investigation,
was that the FBI was going after Trump
and that absolutely wasn't the case.
We opened this very specific case on this one
particular allegation to find out who a person or people were
that might have received this information
or offer of assistance or not.
All of these things kind of come to a head when
he takes that affirmative step to fire Comey,
certainly in a way that is designed
or appears to be designed, to stop these investigations.
So, two things happen.
One, that is, you know, a very strong indication
or an allegation of obstruction,
that he was doing that potentially
in a manner designed to obstruct the investigation of him.
And then two, that gives a question,
because all of this related to Russia,
what is the counterintelligence threat there
between Trump and Russia?
And of course, what's one of the first things he did?
He has Ambassador Kislyak, Russian ambassador,
he has Sergey Lavrov,at the time,
the Russian foreign minister,
in the Oval Office, and is bragging to them,
I just fired Comey. Took a huge weight off my shoulders.
There are a lot of connections to Russia that were concerning,
and there was sort of an ongoing debate.
I mean, you get to a point where the
threshold to open a case is fairly low.
That doesn't mean you necessarily open it.
And there were some on the team that
were arguing that we should open
a case on Trump earlier than we did,
earlier than Comey's firing.
You know, I was against it.
I mean, there any number of real significant
policy questions, legal questions,
constitutional questions.
And so for all of those reasons, I was very hesitant and reticent
to go down the path of opening the case on Trump, the person.
The firing of
FBI Director James Comey led to
the appointment of Robert Mueller
as special counsel to lead the Russia investigation.
The Mueller team found
that Russia's operations were systematic and widespread.
So Russian interference and attempts to aid
candidate Donald Trump have been well-established.
If people will simply read
and open their minds to certain findings, both in
Robert Mueller’s special counsel report, 400 some odd pages,
and then even in the Senate Intelligence Committee report,
which at the time was chaired by a Republican.
So in 2016, the United States was pretty
much asleep to the fact that the Russians
were using disinformation as a weapon
to sow discord and polarization.
So the Russians really had free rein to
do what they wanted in the United States.
And they went about it a couple of different ways.
Their biggest campaign was through social media,
to mask their social media accounts
as trying to be Americans. The I.R.A.
or the Russian proxy organization
was prominent in that space, running
bots and trolls to kind of suck
in Americans to their point of view and enhance polarization.
So one is social media campaign.
The second is they were doing hack and release operations.
So if you've ever heard of Guccifer
2.0, that is a Russian hacking operation
by the GRU to grab information and selectively
leak it again to enhance polarization
within the United States.
And lastly, they were hacking into voter databases
and gathering huge amounts of data rolls.
There was concern at the time that that information
was going to be used to actually disrupt
the physical infrastructure of the vote.
People would claim
that there was no really Russian influence operations in 2016.
That I find to be astounding, that people would repeat that.
For a while, people and still do
say that there was no impact, right?
Like you cannot prove
that the Russians changed a vote or
someone's mind in the United States.
I think as kind of the research behind this has continued,
and people have looked at this and serious professionals,
I think, across whether they're in government, academia
or the private sector, no longer believe
that this is not a serious threat.
And it was a serious threat in 2016.
And the Russian influence operations
have some level of influence
within the United States.
And so the special counsel investigation
actually ended up indicting two dozen Russians.
Twelve of those Russians were actual
card-carrying Russian intelligence
officers with the Russian military
intelligence service, the GRU.
Well, good afternoon.
Today, a grand jury in the District of Columbia
returned an indictment presented by the special counsel's office.
The indictment charges 12
Russian military officers by name
for conspiring to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.
Eleven of the defendants
are charged with conspiring to hack into computers,
steal documents, and release those documents
with the intent to interfere in the election.
One of those defendants and a 12th Russian military officer
are charged with conspiring to infiltrate computers
of organizations involved in administering elections.
So when people say, to me, well, the Russian,
the investigation into Russian influence
in the campaign found nothing,
I say you haven't read the reports.
You're listening only to one source of news and information,
and it's a flawed source of news and information.
The Internet Research Agency is
located in Saint Petersburg, Russia.
(tense music)
And they spent millions before 2016
through 2016 and quite frankly,
have reconstituted themselves twice over
really the same organization still within Saint Petersburg.
And so pre-2016,
they ran a notorious and well-documented troll farm
where they were basically paying employees to,
they had a quota system where they had to,
put out so many tweets and other kind of posts
from a kind of select menu that were all designed
of things that they were looking to cause
polarization in the United States, right?
And the people that are really behind it, which is the GRU
and oligarchs that help set this up,
they're all still operating there largely with impunity.
And they really have never stopped.
Sometimes they’ve moved their operations,
or at least it appeared so, outside of Russia,
and they set up in third countries.
But this is a,
this is a low cost way that they don’t
feel much pain from the United States
or the international community
as to why to stop. So they don't.
So that's why they're back in Saint Petersburg
and they just keep changing their names.
There's been some some great journalistic
work that's come out recently.
According to a New York Times article just came out recently,
you know, the Russians spent about 300 million since 2014.
Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find
the 30,000 emails that are missing.
I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.
Wikileaks. Wikileaks. Wikileaks.
It just came out on Wikileaks.
What we know
is that the Russian intelligence service,
and again, documented through indictments
through both the Senate Intelligence Committee reporting
and the special counsel reporting, and
indictments, the Russian intelligence
service went about getting their hands on emails
out of servers at the Democratic National Committee headquarters,
emails between Hillary Clinton and other campaign officials.
And then those very emails in the possession of the Russian
intelligence service ended up
in the hands of an organization called Wikileaks.
Wikileaks was an organization
that, connected to Julian Assange,
who started out as sort of an information clearinghouse
is how they styled themselves,
where people who are whistleblowers
or information that had been, you know, obtained, stolen,
you know, turned over by a whistleblower
that, you know, allegedly to point
the public eye at alleged malfeasance or bad acts
by various governments, that they would
serve as a clearinghouse for that.
But having said that, they ended up publishing
a great deal of information that was stolen by Russian actors.
The question of how stolen emails,
hacked emails and communications
ended up going from the Russian intelligence service
to Wikileaks
and then ultimately distributed by Wikileaks, in perfect
timing to aid Donald Trump at key times,
is a fascinating story and fascinating question.
But we know that someone by the name of Roger Stone,
very close advisor, associate of the president,
appeared to have knowledge, claimed himself
to have knowledge of what Wikileaks was doing.
Even Donald Trump Jr appeared to have contact
with and knowledge of what Wikileaks was doing.
We even have a report -
this is coming from the Mueller investigation - that
an associate of Donald Trump is riding with Donald Trump.
Rick, this is Rick Gates, they're riding in a limo
to LaGuardia Airport.
Donald Trump takes a phone call
and Gates can hear that
end of the call.
Trump hangs up,
and Trump says something like this to Gates:
there's going to be another release.
You know, there's going to be another Wikileaks release.
Now, it's believed that the person on the
other end of that phone was Roger Stone,
conveying to Donald Trump
that Wikileaks was about to release
another tranche of stolen communications
- stolen by the Russian intelligence service,
acquired by Wikileaks -
and that this was going to aid the campaign.
And the absurd thing is Trump at some point in time said, well,
I have no idea what Wikileaks is, which is,
you know, again, you go back and you look at the tapes
of his campaign events again and again and again,
he was talking about how magnificent Wikileaks is,
and they're wonderful, and the truth is coming out.
Do you still love Wikileaks?
I know nothing about Wikileaks.
It's not my thing.
Various news organizations noted how absurd Trump's claim was.
Wikileaks! Wikileaks! I love Wikileaks!
These Wikileaks.
It's been amazing what's coming out on Wikileaks.
The wonder of Wikileaks.
Wikileaks has done a job on her, hasn't it?
We love Wikileaks.
Boy, they have really... Wikileaks.
Wikileaks. Wikileaks.
The Wikileaks revelations. Wikileaks.
Wikileaks. Right? Wikileaks.
This Wikileaks is like a treasure trove.
And so it's clear, one, that he was well
aware of Wikileaks, that he was pushing it.
And again, not just pushing
Wikileaks, he is pushing information
about his opponent that had been
stolen by a hostile foreign nation.
And then it had been provided ultimately
to Wikileaks, who was publishing it.
So he essentially is not only pointing to the stolen material,
but encouraging this action by a hostile state actor
to help himself get elected.
Do you still love Wikileaks?
I know nothing about Wikileaks.
It's not my thing.
It's not my deal in life.
Alright, so after our long national nightmare,
my handpicked attorney general says I'm in the clear.
That's right.
No collusion. None. Zippo.
Zilch. Nada.
Barr says it's right there in the Mueller report.
Couple of years, thousands of pages.
Guy reads it over the weekend. Gotta love him.
No collusion.
If by collusion, you mean me writing
code for Russian government hackers.
Didn't happen. Just ask Mueller.
This is all been one big witch hunt that has turned up nothing.
Except my campaign chair,
personal lawyer, deputy campaign chair,
national security adviser,
foreign policy advisor, strategists
and a couple dozen Russians.
But other than that, nothing!
Now I can get back to work and shoot
someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue.
Robert Mueller found multiple instances
of collusion, but he didn't find
that they rose to the definition of a criminal conspiracy.
And this distinction is very important.
Collusion doesn't have a legal meaning
outside of very specific arenas like antitrust law.
But what we think of when we think of collusion
is secret contacts.
An agreement to engage in sort of a covert behavior
to a mutually desired outcome.
Criminal conspiracy is a much higher bar.
It requires an explicit agreement,
which you normally wouldn't
find in an intelligence operation
to commit an underlying crime.
And on this front, it became very difficult,
given both the nature of the contacts that were happening and
also the fact that there was obstruction
involved in this investigation,
for Mueller to really reach that
high threshold for a criminal indictment.
When you are looking at counterintelligence operations,
not everything that a foreign
adversary is doing might be a crime.
But that doesn't mean that it's
not dangerous to national security.
And so, yes, the level of contacts,
information sharing and coordination between
Russia and members of the Trump campaign
were dangerous to our national security.
But by looking at it only through this
criminal lens, we essentially created
an out for people to claim that this was
not actually dangerous behavior.
With a so-called four page summary,
he held a press conference so that he could shape the report.
And if you really pick apart every word and line
in that four page summary and in that press conference,
you've got an attorney general who is deceiving
the United States about a special
counsel investigation and the results.
So, for example, he claimed in that summary that
there was no collusion found with Russia.
Well, that's simply not the case.
The truth is that Bob Mueller did not
find something called criminal conspiracy, right?
The ability to say this candidate
knew precisely that he was dealing
with the Russian government and broke
a violation and violated US laws
in a large conspiracy involving others.
True, criminal conspiracy not found,
but collusion with Russia was rampant.
And there's a hundred or more contacts
that were found between his campaign
staff and Russian officials,
or people representing Russian interests.
A hundred or more contacts.
That is collusion,
even though it may not be criminal conspiracy.
I think the most important takeaway from
everything that happened with Mueller
is the broad scope of activity,
illegal activity that occurred on the one
hand by the government of Russia and
agents of the government of Russia.
You know, indictments against the Internet Research Agency
and several of the players in and around that.
But then also, when you look at the people in and around Trump's
circle, both as a candidate and then later as the president.
There were guilty pleas and convictions
of his national security adviser,
his campaign manager, his deputy campaign manager,
his informal fixer, his personal attorney and the
list just goes, you know, a foreign policy advisor.
The list goes on and on and on.
And these weren't allegations.
These were people who broke the law.
Charges were brought and were found or pled guilty.
So there's no question, there's no ambiguity.
These people got up and said yes.
At some point in time, they were either
convicted or pled guilty to saying yes,
I violated the law. And all these
things in some way, shape or form
had elements involving connections
to the government of Russia.
You know, certainly there are the
actions of one, you know, an attorney
in the FBI who had changed an email in the course of,
you know, pursuing one particular
FISA with regard to Carter Page.
But again, Carter Page was a tiny
little sliver of all of this.
All these broad looks conclusively determined,
even by partisan actors, trying to find information,
came up with no evidence that there was something that
was improper in the context of any of these investigations.
Bill Barr is a liar, and I don't say that lightly.
I grew up as a lawyer. Now I'm in media.
You don't lightly call someone a liar.
Maybe you say it nicer. You say he misstated the truth.
But when I went through Bill Barr's record,
there were so many instances of him
not just sort of fudging the truth.
Yes, there were plenty of those.
Or coming up with implausible explanations,
but just outright lying to Congress,
to the media, to the American public.
And I couldn't ignore it.
And so I felt like, this was one of those extreme situations
where it was merited to call somebody a liar.
Barr announced that there was no collusion
and that Mueller had found the same.
But Mueller says in the report
collusion isn't a term I'm concerned with.
It's not a legal term. It's not a criminal term.
So the same way Mueller found there was no collusion,
the same way Mueller found there was no flying elephants.
I mean, it didn't matter either way.
And so Bill Barr, not only did he
dishonestly characterize Mueller's report,
he strategically and deviously manipulated
the timing of the release of the report.
I'll tell you a few things that we would have known
if Barr had released Mueller's summaries.
First of all, we would have known that
the Russians committed crimes to interfere with the election.
That they did it in order to help Donald Trump win.
That Donald Trump's team knew about these efforts,
and that Donald Trump's team expected
to benefit from those efforts.
So people can argue all day about was there collusion?
Was there not collusion?
People disagree.
But those facts are indisputable.
The Russians committed crimes.
They did it because they wanted Trump to win.
The Trump campaign knew about it and
the Trump campaign expected to benefit.
And I would add
the Trump campaign
engaged in dozens of efforts to
establish contact with the Russians.
So Bill Barr, in his four pager,
not only did he characterize
Mueller's report, but he also threw
in a conclusion of his own, which was
there was no obstruction of justice.
I think Bill Barr was wildly incorrect in this.
A thousand plus former federal prosecutors, including me,
signed a letter saying this should be obstruction.
The evidence here is more than sufficient for obstruction.
Barr just sort of waved it away.
Barr said, well, for one thing,
it's unusual to have obstruction
unless you have some underlying crime.
That's just nonsense.
I mean, by Barr's reasoning, if you were really,
really good at obstructing justice, you
could never get charged with anything
because you can never charge the underlying crime.
So why wasn't Trump charged with any crimes?
The problem for Mueller is that there
is an internal Office of Legal Counsel
memorandum in the Department of Justice, which makes it
a Department of Justice policy
not to indict a sitting president.
He felt that to make such an accusation in his report,
if it wasn't going to be followed up
with an actual indictment and a trial,
would deprive Trump of the opportunity to clear his name.
In other words, it would be unfair to him.
It would create a cloud of suspicion and stigma over him.
He left his findings inconclusive, but noted that
Trump could be charged once he left office.
One of the ironies of the Mueller report
is that volume one
isn't able to find enough evidence
sufficient to be able to charge a criminal conspiracy.
However, that's partly because of what we find in volume two,
which is the efforts to obstruct the investigation.
And so both of these parts of the report
form one big picture of both
the coordinated efforts between the Trump campaign and Russia
and their efforts to undermine the
investigation into that interference.
(tense music)
One of Donald Trump's
big talking points towards the latter
phases of the Mueller report and after
Mueller was done, was investigate the
investigators. It's revenge time now.
And that's where John Durham became special counsel.
Bill Barr tapped John Durham to do just that.
And by the way, John Durham's
investigation has now taken way longer
than Mueller's investigation and yielded far, far less.
And so this was Barr
engaging and facilitating Donald Trump's revenge fantasies.
And, frankly, Bill Barr's own revenge fantasies,
because Bill Barr has said
he was always from before he
became attorney general, skeptical
of and more of Bob Mueller's investigation.
But he has since, Bill Barr calls it Russiagate
and the Russia hoax, and he is very aggressive about it.
Well, appointing John Durham to investigate the investigators
was the ultimate act of retribution
and of political revenge.
Of course, it's completely backfired
because John Durham has been
a massive dud and a massive embarrassment.
You already had three separate reports concluding that
Bob Mueller's investigation was not
just appropriate, but necessary.
You had the Inspector General of DOJ.
You had Mueller himself, and you had a Republican-led Senate
committee, all of which said not just
it was appropriate for Robert Mueller
to investigate Russian
interference, but it was necessary.
It would have been malpractice not to.
Robert Mueller did not run a perfect investigation.
To be sure, there were faults in the investigation.
The Inspector General found this.
I mean, you had texts, internal texts, most infamously,
I think, from FBI agent Peter Strzok showing he
absolutely had bias, political and
personal bias against Donald Trump.
That's a problem that's worth addressing.
And we shouldn't ever breeze by that.
That does not mean, however, that nothing happened.
That does not mean there was no attempt to connect with Russia.
There were plenty of those.
That does not mean Russia didn't try to interfere.
They absolutely did.
So both of those things can be true at the same time.
And then for Bill Barr in
particular, to come along and appoint
somebody like John Durham looking
into something, you know, one,
there was this very early statement that
John Durham publicly made after DOJ’s
Inspector General releases his report
where Durham, said, well, I disagree
with some of his conclusions about
the opening of the investigation.
Well, I was there. I opened the case.
I know what happened.
And what the IG said is exactly the way that occurred.
So I'm not sure what it is that caused this
sitting U.S. attorney to make this extraordinary
public statement of disagreement
with what I know to be the truth.
People who want to find fault with
the Russia investigation are finding
little nooks and crannies
into some of the things that Durham has filed gratuitously.
But no, John Durham's work, by and large
has cast no meaningful doubt
on the necessity of the Russia investigation.
(tense music)
Strzok's testimony before Congress
showed that partisan attacks
are now commonplace with regard to the Russia investigation.
And you have come in here and said, I have no bias,
and you do it with a straight face.
And I watched you in the private testimony you gave.
And I told some of the other guys, he is really good.
He's lying.
He knows we know he's lying.
And he can probably pass a polygraph.
It's amazing-- - Mr. Chairman.
- This is my time... - Mr. Chairman.
I'm sorry. Point of order.
The gentleman will state his point of order.
A member of this committee
just asserted that this witness who was under oath
and a former agent of the FBI lied.
There is no evidence of that and I ask him to withdraw it.
I do not withdraw it.
He is not a member of Congress.
It's not a violation of the rule.
And just as you have been
expressing bias through your members
about what a hero he is...
There is not a single person on this committee
who has ever characterized...
The gentleman from Rhode Island...
The gentleman from Rhode Island
will suspend.
No, the disgrace is
what this man has done.
The gentleman from Texas will suspend for a moment.
There is the disgrace, and it won't be recaptured
any time soon because of the damage
you've done to the justice system.
And I've talked to FBI agents around the country.
You've embarrassed them.
You've been embarrassed yourself.
And I can't help but wonder when I see
you looking there with a little smirk,
how many times did you look so innocent
into your wife's eyes and lie to her about Lisa Page?
Mr. Chairman, this is outrageous!
(indistinct shouting)
Mr. Chairman, please?
(indistinct shouting)
This is intolerable, harassment of the witness!
You need your medication!
Strzok defended the FBI, saying partisan
attacks were hurting the agency.
Everybody's watching this and making up their own mind.
And what I would tell you
is one,
I'm sitting here telling you the truth.
And two, independent of me,
I cannot express to you my love of the FBI enough.
The men and women who make up that workforce, their ethics,
their integrity are unmatched anywhere in the world.
And I think that's important, one, because it is who we are.
Two, that none of them
would accept any of the behaviors
that are being alleged any more than
I would accept it in him.
And three,
this entire exercise comes at a cost.
We are doing things that are
going to, in the future, tear down
the underpinnings of what represent
law and order in this country.
So did the Russians tip the 2016 election?
That's the focus of Cyberwar by
Professor Kathleen Hall Jamieson.
We begin with a key question: did Russia turn
the outcome of the last presidential race?
I believe it's highly probable that they did.
Not certain, but highly probable.
Three ways to get there: troll influence -
those were the imposters in cyberspace,
influence of hacking on media agenda, including hacked content
used as a basis of questions that hurt Clinton in...
..two debates, and a possible
influence of Russian disinformation
on James Comey's decision on October
28th to basically let the public know
that he had reopened the server
investigation. It changed the media agenda
and she dropped in the polls 2.5%.
That could have been a decisive influence all by itself.
Nicely done.
When I get asked, do I think the Russians
succeeded in actually influencing
to the point where Americans voted a
certain way based on that influence?
I tell you first, honestly, I don't know.
But my conclusion, if forced to come to
one, would be I think so, I think it worked.
Perhaps the most tangible likelihood
that that was successful would be
with the breach into DNC emails
and communications involving Hillary Clinton
and her staff and associates.
He repeated the Wikileaks theme.
He repeated the mantra of look at what Hillary is saying.
Look at what her staff is saying about her.
That's stolen material,
Trump used it,
and it's clear
it came from the Russian intelligence services.
Paul Manafort's contacts and coordination
with Konstantin Kilimnik
is exactly what we mean when we say collusion.
This is a clandestine,
coordinated attempt to achieve an outcome,
in this case helping Russia interfere in the 2016 election.
What's key about the polling data that Manafort
provided to Konstantin Kilimnik is that the Russians needed this
on the ground intelligence in order to know where to focus
their disinformation and influence operation efforts.
By gathering intelligence on where
small changes in voting behavior
or turnout can make a big
difference in the electoral outcome,
Russia was able to target its operations very effectively,
and Manafort helped them with that.
(tense music)
When you look at the number of voters
if you tally up the sum total
between Pennsylvania, Michigan and I think Wisconsin,
the number of voters that you would have to change their mind
to cause the election to go to Clinton instead of Trump?
You could fit them all in Michigan Stadium,
you know, in Ann Arbor.
It's a very small number.
So I agree with people when they say,
look, you know, if you look at malign
Russian activity, it's not going to move the needle 4, 5 or 6%.
And that's true. But that's not the point.
The point is you need to move the needle a tiny percent of 1%.
You don't need a big shift.
So when it comes to what the Russians did
even if it moved the needle 0.1, 0.2%... that's enough.
And so consequently, had they not done that,
might the campaign, might the election have gone differently?
Sure. And I think it would have.
Now, you can extend that reasoning to... had Director
Comey not made the announcement to reopen
the investigation, might it have changed it?
Yes. In a campaign that close, there are any number of factors
that could be determinative.
But, one of them was absolutely the government of Russia.
I wouldn't necessarily disagree.
I have not read the book.
So I need to put that out there.
I wouldn't disagree,
but I don't know if we have the data
to kind of back that up empirically.
So as a hypothesis, I don't disagree with it.
But from an empirical side,
I'd have to review the data to kind
of get a better measure on that.
So in September
of 2020, I filed a much more comprehensive complaint.
But the core of it
was that the suppression of intelligence
as related to 2020 elections
for political purposes to support Donald Trump
and let Joe Biden be, you know, denigrated, right?
In July of 2020,
my office wrote a report basically outlining
specific information that we were going to send
to our stakeholders at an unclassified level,
that the Russians were going to
denigrate Joe Biden and try to pump up
President Trump. Specifically, I got an
email from the chief of staff saying
Chad Wolf knows you're about to put
this out, but he'd like to see you.
So I knew what it was going to be about.
So, of course, I went and saw him and he asked me to hold
the information, and I said I'm not going to do that.
And he's like, I'm ordering you to hold it.
And I told him I wouldn't do it.
He wanted the information held
because it was going to make President
Trump look bad.
The public demands that you hold these
offices and do what's right for the country
and not for yourself.
So, I mean, I find that argument to be disgusting.
In 2024, if Trump runs for it, well, I won't vote for him,
and I don't think he's fit for office.
I think he will damage this country in ways that are worse
than what he's done so far.
I think that while the Russians have
done their job of enhancing polarization
and discord in the United States, they
pale in comparison to Trump by himself.
And so I think really where he showed
his true colors to the American
people was after he lost.
(tense music)
In November of 2020,
as we lead into January 6th,
just a very dangerous predicament
he's put the country in. The lies that he has told
and for things that I believe he
probably thinks aren't true anyways, right?
And the polarization that he's caused.
I think we are in a worse place.
And, you know, I think he's the direct cause of that.
The Russians are certainly trying to influence
the US 2024 elections. In the company I work in now
called Logically, you know, we're looking at this happen in
real time on social media. We are
a social media analysis company,
so we see people and signs of what we think are the Russians.
There's no doubt in my mind that they're still involved.
So I ended up becoming the highest-ranking
whistleblower in U.S. history.
It's not a kind of thing, a title
I thought I would ever have.
And anyone that knows me would never have envisioned
that would be the place that I would be in.
But I am proud of it.
Because when I think
when I was called to do the right thing, I did.
(brooding music)
I'm not into golden showers!
You know the great thing, our great first lady,
"That one," she said. "I don't believe that one."
He's not into golden showers, as they say they call them.
I don't like that idea.
Former FBI Director Comey's
remarks on ABC fueled speculation
that the salacious rumor might be true.
And I started to tell him about the allegation was that
he had been involved with prostitutes in a hotel
in Moscow in 2013, during a visit
for the Miss Universe pageant,
and that the Russians had filmed the episode.
I honestly never thought these
words would come out of my mouth,
but I don't know whether the current
president of the United States
was with prostitutes peeing on each other in Moscow in 2013.
It's possible, but I don't know.
Years after his dossier, Christopher Steele added
to the intrigue that a videotape might exist.
And today, do you still believe that that tape exists?
I think it probably does, but I
wouldn't put 100% certainty on it.
A report in the British newspaper The Guardian,
further added to the intrigue.
(brooding music)
And just in case you missed seeing me, here I am.
A golden shower, (laughs)
or sometimes referred to as water sports,
is when somebody likes to urinate
on someone or be urinated on.
Basically, it's a pee party.
So I think for some the kink is domination,
you know, and or marking territory.
I don't really know.
I like I said, I'm not into it, but
those are the things I've been told.
You know, the humiliation of it, you know, pee on me or worse.
You know, we all know about, you know,
the alternative to that is.
But I think it's the act of humiliation.
People who like to be spanked or put leashes on or,
you know, it's a very submissive thing to be peed on.
I mean, I get asked a lot what,
what I think about the allegation of
Trump and the golden shower tape from 2013.
There's different versions of it.
I always assumed that he had
been peed on or peed on somebody,
but I guess the actual story is that he only watched
two Russian prostitutes urinate on a
bed that the Obamas allegedly slept in.
But the way...
is that that bad?
I don't, I don't know, but I mean,
I think a lot of people assume
that he got peed on because he's kind of a bitch.
I'm Katie Morgan, and I am an adult movie star.
I've been doing adult movies for 20 years now,
and I absolutely love all the orgasms.
Of course, I'm familiar with golden showers.
It's one of those things.
Everybody's got their kink.
Golden showers are when you find it
sexually exciting to pee on someone
or to get peed on by someone.
Or, I guess, really, any way that you involve
urine in your sex play for
gratification counts as golden showers.
It's actually been around since the early 40s
in the slang dictionary. So it's a pretty old idea.
Apparently people really like to pee on each other.
I've heard it called water sports.
I've heard it called golden rain.
I've heard it called a few different things,
but in general, if you say golden
anything, people know it's pee.
So the allegation with Trump was
that in 2013, at a hotel in Moscow,
he watched prostitutes pee on the
same bed that the Obamas slept in.
It's so weird. And, it's funny,
I always thought he was either peed on or he peed on someone.
I never knew the details until I did the research.
The rumor is that there's actual
video evidence that this happened,
so... I have not seen the video, but I'd watch it.
Truth or not? I don't know.
I don't know, he just... even if you
just watched, I would admit it.
Who cares?
I mean, it's not like he was involved.
He just watched. Maybe.
Yeah,
you know, I used to think that story about
the golden shower tape couldn't possibly
be true because it seemed so far- fetched.
But nowadays, is it really that far-fetched?
Anything is possible when it comes to the orange hobgoblin.
Unless some of you have been under a rock,
that in 2006, I met Donald Trump
at a golf tournament, a celebrity
golf tournament in Lake Tahoe.
And he invited me to dinner and I agreed
and went to his hotel to meet him
for what I was told was dinner.
And that ended up turning into a three hour conversation,
which did not include any conversation about sex or
escorting or money for sex, or any of those things.
And I went to the ladies room or the
bathroom in his room and came out
to find him perched in his underwear on the bed.
And I was too afraid to say no.
I tried to walk past him, and he got between me and the door.
I knew his security guard was
outside, and basically we had talked
for several hours about how I wanted to be a director
in mainstream and,
you know, all of that stuff, and he
kind of used some of that against me.
And I was cornered.
And I... honestly, I just froze.
You know, he didn't physically force me.
He didn't threaten me with violence.
I definitely could outrun him.
But I just froze.
And... we had sex.
I mean, I guess I should have seen it coming,
because when I arrived at the room,
he apologized for being late.
He had had a phone call, and he opened the door
in his black silk pajamas.
And I laughed at him, thinking to myself,
this motherfucker's trying to be Hugh Hefner.
And I told him to go put some fucking clothes on.
I also then famously spanked him with a magazine
because during our conversation,
he was bragging about all of his accolades
and achievements.
And, you know, he was peacocking
and didn't let me get a word in and
didn't ask me anything about myself.
And after, you know, a very long time of this,
he produced a magazine that he was very
proud of, that he was on the cover of.
And I think he even was like, it's not
even out yet, but I have an advance copy.
And I... at that point I was hungry,
I had been lied to.
I get very hangry
and I was tired of listening to this
buffoon just talk about himself.
So I just quipped at him,
somebody should spank you with that magazine.
I just snatched it from him,
rolled it up and told him to turn around.
I smacked him on the ass.
I think somebody should spank him with
a rolled-up newspaper or magazine daily.
God, he's dumb.
Obviously, he's into them.
They certainly seem to be on his mind.
I mean, he certainly seems to be
into golden showers if he's randomly
talking about them in business meetings.
God, he's so stupid. And I think that's one of the tells
that the golden shower tape might exist -
he can't stop talking about it.
When other people do stop talking
about it, he brings it up again.
He is so dumb.
What was sex with Trump like?
Hands down, the worst and most
regrettable 90 seconds of my life.
I didn't even get to pee on him.
(brooding music)
Trump's former attorney,
Michael Cohen, wrote that rumors of
a videotape had circulated for years
and, quote, knowing the boss, anything was possible.
Cohen also wrote that Trump
visited a raunchy nightclub in Las Vegas
with a Russian oligarch, a nightclub
that featured a simulated golden showers routine.
Some suspect
that Trump's appearance at the nightclub
might have sparked the salacious rumor.
So what was the club's name and what was it like?
(upfront dance music)
The Vegas nightclub was closed
shortly after Trump visited it,
one month after a judge ordered it
to clean up its risque sex shows.
In his book, Cohen says his heart sank when a friend said
he heard rumors in 2016 about a pee tape.
His friend denies Cohen's allegations.
For him to say that we discussed pee tapes
is, in my opinion, disgusting...
...when you're talking about
someone that calls you a brother.
I know that he's selling every book
he can sell, and I'm fine with that.
Except you can't just
go on a spree of talking about your friend,
you know, and lying about some of
the things that you were saying.
He took action. He did this, did that.
So when I got a phone call from a friend of mine in Moscow
and he said, listen, you know, I was sitting at dinner and,
I overheard somebody saying about some tapes about
Mr. Trump, and so forth.
And he told me that he wasn't concerned.
Not in a dramatic way.
He just said, listen, I know you're in business
with the Trump Organization, but this is what's going on.
And like I said, a lot of conversations were about tapes.
Access Hollywood, famous Access Hollywood tape,
and pretty much everybody was saying, oh,
there should be other tapes, you know.
And it could be anywhere else,
not only in the U.S.
Hello! How are you?
So, just the general concern about this type of rumor
or gossip was not taken too lightly by me.
So, I,
after that call, soon after,
I texted Michael and I said, listen,
you know,someone is bragging about some tapes.
I don't think it's a big deal.
But so you know,
this is what's going on. And the only thing that I misused,
I'd say, or I said it in a wrong way, was stop flow of tapes.
Basically, what I meant, it was
evening time, you know, we have kids
and a lot going on.
A lot of times we speak into the phone.
I can't remember if
I was speaking into the phone or was dialing into the phone.
It was a long time ago, so I said stop flow,
there are no tapes.
There is no flow of tapes from Russia.
Don't worry about that.
It's not a big deal.
But you should know that's what's going on.
There are rumors. And er... Michael was not clear.
Tapes of what?
And it was a friendly back and forth,
not even a phone conversation. The text message ended there.
We never continued the conversation about that.
But for Michael to go on a limb and make that up,
that we had phone conversations, that we discussed these tapes,
and he sent me on a hunt,
because he knew that I had business connections in Russia,
all this, all of that is entirely untrue.
It's false.
I was a good friend to Michael.
I was an important...
link between the Trump Organization and Georgia
and the expansion of the Trump brand in that part of the world.
So he should have been truthful. Kompromat.
So, it's a Russian word, compromising materials.
It was really, the whole idea started
during Stalin, you know, collecting
compromising materials on people,
pretty much on anybody, just in case
that person succeeds in something.
I think kompromat is everywhere,
but especially in our culture today,
we see a lot of kompromat.
Well, they knocked on the door.
There were two FBI agents.
They were part of the Mueller team.
I invited them in as politely as I
could, and we sat down and we had a chat
and chat became a long,
about 2.5 hour, three hour conversation.
Which also turned into more of an
interrogation, and it turned into
more of a very clear picture that this was not over.
It was just the beginning of our ordeal.
I was a gracious host.
Georgia is known, my native country is known to be,
first we are hosts and we welcome everyone.
And that's basically how I behaved.
And suddenly,
the head prosecutor is throwing you under the bus,
saying you're Russian.
We had an almost eight hour conversation
about Georgia and how Georgia was great
and how I was born in Georgia and
how important America was for me. All that.
And suddenly, she completely disregarded all of that
and she's telling everybody that
this guy and his family come from Moscow.
At that moment,
I said, I'm going to have to speak up.
And the fact is I'm not Russian.
Now, the agenda was to show that
there was some type of collusion.
I get it. They were doing their job, you know,
they were looking into
every single detail to protect our nation,
to protect the integrity of the...
the presidential institute and all this and the election.
But... I had nothing to do with it.
I'm not naive.
I'm not saying,
oh, there was a big agenda to take
Trump down and do all of that.
And... if there is a rumor about the sitting president
of the United States, you better look into it, for sure.
Everybody should.
And I was totally fine with them asking me these questions.
Why did you send the text message and what was going on.
But I told them the truth, and I
thought I did my job as a citizen
who is trying to help you to understand
a much bigger picture.
After the Mueller report referred
to him as a Russian businessman
and insinuated that he knew about
the content of the tapes,
Giorgi demanded a retraction.
His request was denied,
which prompted him to file a lawsuit against Robert Mueller.
I lost money, I lost my reputation.
The only thing I'm trying to get out
of this and everyone's lesson should be
you should never, ever quit.
If your name
and identity, heritage and nationality
is damaged,
you should try everything you can to get it back.
Well, I joined the KGB after
I graduated from high school.
Actually, I was accepted because of my father's background.
He was a KGB officer.
Although my father, by the way, was against me joining the KGB.
And I said, why? Said that's dirty work, my son.
I said, but you spent 20 years there.
That's why I tell you it's dirty work.
Well, my main job was to recruit Americans.
I mean, people with knowledge or access to, well, secrets,
I mean,
all sorts of information not available in the media.
So that's typical spy work,
and that's what I was actually trained to do.
Putin was a nobody, I mean in Saint Petersburg,
just a guy who would knock on my door.
I had a secretary, the secretary would say,
some guy came, I let him come in.
May I have some pictures,
I mean, documents signed? Oh, of course.
So that's that.
That's all I knew about him.
He had no position.
I mean, no leadership or anything.
And so Putin was pulled out from nowhere
and became an assistant to the mayor of Saint Petersburg.
Well, Putin proved to be, in that
sense, well, an efficient guy.
I mean, and,
so he did come to Moscow and slowly,
gradually grew to become the member,
I mean, actually the chief of the
Russian internal Security - the KGB.
So when Putin called me a traitor,
I called him a war criminal.
And I said the war in Chechnya one day
will reveal the ugly nature
of the guy who is running Russia today.
Putin will go down in Russian history
as an ambitious, cruel, I mean, inhuman,
I mean, performer of his own ambitions
and his own, you know, desires.
Well, in my view, he's just a killer.
Putin has been trying to
intervene into practically
every major country's internal affairs.
This is part of the legacy of the Soviet mentality.
And Putin, in many ways, remains
loyal to the Soviet, you know, mentality.
There are some similarities between Trump and Putin,
I believe, in the human and political way.
Putin's, as I know him,
you know, really
(his) main goal today is to stay in power
as long as he can. And he will do anything to,
you know, remove any obstacles
or will commit any crime, really,
just to stay in power in Russia.
He knows how to take advantage of these things because he,
in his position as a former KGB guy,
he was very much involved in the
sorts of things which would put people
in difficult positions where kompromat
was an inevitable part of their lives.
Well, to place a naked lady into his room,
you expected that for the guy,
but that pictures would be taken, you know?
In that sense the KGB in the...
post-Soviet days have not
changed much. In the Soviet days,
they would use more direct ways to get rid of people just,
you know, either in jail or just execution.
In Putin's Russia,
it's more to get people hooked,
and with some information related to their either
financial indiscretions or human, I mean, sexual...
that's more typical of the current Russian regime.
Well, I could not tell you anything
about now since I've been out of Russia for many years.
But there were several hotels, public places,
which were controlled by the KGB.
And if necessary, the special operations
would be provided by the KGB inside these hotels,
where they would control the personal behavior and everything
of the people who they were interested in,
you know. And that has not changed much.
You should not forget Putin is a former KGB guy
and his mentality in many ways remains the same.
Trump's reputation in the circles which I am familiar
with inside the U.S. you know, is not a good one.
The fact that Trump was interested in the
Russian, well, female community, let's put it
this way, is a known fact and
it's known to the U.S government.
I know the U.S government was informed
about it by the Russian authorities.
I would say that
Mr. Putin is rather discreet because if he starts
sharing this information widely he may be in trouble himself.
Because there is also information about
President Putin as well. (laughs)
(dramatic music)
Through my experience leading
counterintelligence investigations
for the FBI working against the Russian
intelligence services, I can tell you
that it would shock me to learn
that there is no file
on Donald Trump in Moscow
and at Russian intelligence service headquarters.
In fact, that would be a complete
anomaly from how they conduct themselves
when they spot, assess and ultimately
target American businessmen,
American candidates for office at all levels.
So I've never been in the rumor business,
but we certainly are aware, right, that
as a public that there's this
accusation, allegation out there that somehow Trump
may have been compromised with prostitutes in a hotel room
at the Ritz-Carlton, Moscow, in or
around the Miss Universe pageant.
The Ritz-Carlton, Moscow,
and other westernized hotels
in Russia, are highly compromised by
the Russian intelligence services.
You are under audio and video surveillance
much of the time in such hotels.
And if such a thing happened or something like that happened,
it would almost definitely have been recorded.
Trump's reaction to the allegation
only added to the curiosity
of former FBI Chief Comey and former Agent Stzrok.
He says he may want me to investigate it
to prove that it didn't happen.
And then he says, something that
distracted me because he said, you know,
if there's even a 1% chance my wife
thinks that's true, that's terrible.
And I, and I remember thinking, how could
your wife think there's a 1% chance you were
with prostitutes peeing on each other in Moscow?
I'm a flawed human being, but
there’s literally zero chance that
my wife would think that was true.
So what kind of marriage
to what kind of man does your wife think
there's only a 99% chance you didn't do that?
His response was there were no prostitutes,
there were never any prostitutes.
If you didn't, if that information,
if that activity had not occurred,
a logical person,
your response is... if I accuse you,
if I accuse anybody of something that's absolutely wrong,
people tend to get angry and they
flat out deny it. Never happened.
That's wrong. Absolutely not.
But to sort of hedge and say,
there were no prostitutes, is a very,
is a very unusual response.
And it is a response
that leads me to question whether,
in fact, that event did occur.
I kind of believe in the pee pee tapes.
And I'll tell you why. I believe in the pee pee tape
because it's so in character, and it's the kind of thing
that you wouldn't even think to make up, you know what I mean?
Like, if I was going to make something up
like, oh, whatever, he was with women and,
you know, they've been using that kompromat for years, right?
They get you in a hotel and they photograph you
with a... having sex with someone, like that's
their standard operating procedure.
But what Trump wanted the
prostitutes to do was pee on the bed
because Obama had been there
and he just hated Obama so much he just wanted to piss on Obama?
Only a malignant narcissist would be that sick.
I mean, just have sex with the women.
But you know, that would be normal.
So for him, it's more
sexually exciting
to pee on Obama's bed, right, than
to have sex with a beautiful woman.
That's... a perversion.
And that's exactly the way in which he is perverse.
And so it became apparent to me
very early on that this was someone
who was extremely dangerous.
Not just someone who had a mental illness,
but someone who literally had
the most dangerous mental illness
a person can have.
And still be capable
of actually carrying out the office of president.
Malignant narcissism is actually not
a diagnosis you'll find in the DSM.
It was actually introduced by the famed analyst
Erich Fromm, who himself escaped the Nazis in the 40s.
And he invented the diagnosis or came up with the diagnosis
to explain the psychology of Hitler and
other malignant narcissistic leaders,
other grandiose, murderous leaders who
have been with us throughout history.
So Hitler was not a one-off.
He was maybe the worst or most
extreme example, but he's a type,
and that's what Fromm was saying.
And the type basically has four components: one, narcissism.
Obviously, we all know Trump's a narcissist,
but the other three components
are equally important: paranoia.
So his constant feeling that he is being persecuted,
he is constantly feeling aggrieved.
His projection onto other people that they are,
whether they're minorities or his
opponents, that they are evil.
And therefore deserving of terrible punishment.
All of that is part of his paranoia.
And, of course, his crazy conspiracy
theories are also part of his paranoia.
And the third component is antisocial personality disorder,
or what used to be called psychopathy.
Meaning that he has no moral center.
He's a constant liar.
He violates the rights of others, exploits others,
has no sense of guilt or anxiety
about the bad things that he does.
So that's the criminal personality disorder, basically.
And all of the people in jail, most of them have antisocial
personality disorders.
And the fourth component is... sadism,
that he actually gets pleasure
from harming his enemies or taking
revenge or humiliating other people
or subjugating them, dominating them
in ways that are humiliating and show his great power.
I recognized early on that this
was a very, very dangerous, Hitler-like character.
And so that's really kind of part of how
the 'duty to warn movement' got started.
It's not just an ethical principle,
it's a legal law that if you become
aware that a patient might hurt somebody,
you have a duty to warn that person.
Hence, our feeling was, if we have a duty to warn one person
because as mental health professionals
we realize they may be at risk,
what's our duty to 300 million people?
(laughs)
It's got to be 300 million times greater.
So then, what is Trump's defense to the allegation?
Does anyone really believe that story?
I'm also very much of a germaphobe, by the way.
Believe me.
I had to explain...
they said, sir, they said when you were in Russia...
well, I was there for so short a period...
Trump tried to claim that he didn't stay overnight in Russia
during the night in question, but flight
records later revealed that to be false.
Big surprise. Right?
And they said this thing with the golden shower,
and I said I didn't care about the other stuff.
The other stuff was, you know, nuclear...
I didn't worry about that.
The golden shower was a problem for me.
And I said to our great first lady...
She said, nope, that one you didn't do.
See, I'm a germaphobe.
She said, that one you didn't do.
So she knew immediately - I had no problem.
I said, whew, that was a close one.
That wasn't good.
Actually, that one she didn't believe
because she said he's a germaphobe. He's not into that,
you know?
(brooding music)
He's not into golden showers, as they say
they call them. He's not.
I don't like that idea.
No, I didn't. I thought that would be a big problem.
I was going to have a rough night,
but that one she was very good on.
She said, no, you're okay on that one.
So what do you think? Should we believe him?
I say we ask someone who might just know: me.
But then the defense is, oh, there's no way he
would ever do that because he's a germaphobe.
And, you know, that's one of the things
that people try to say that I'm making it up
because he's such a germaphobe, that he wouldn't...
(laughs)
In my multiple encounters
with him, he was definitely not a germaphobe.
He definitely stuck his little pointy tongue in my mouth.
He's the worst kisser on earth,
but definitely an open-mouth kiss.
And didn't even volunteer to use a condom.
Not only did he not use a condom or offer to use a condom,
he didn't even discuss the possibility of it.
I mean, he doesn't even know if I washed
my hands when I came out of the bathroom.
He just pounced there in his underwear
when I came out and surprised me.
Now, I gotta say, if you're not the one getting peed on,
being a germaphobe really doesn't
have anything to do with it.
If they're across the room,
that's not touching you anyway.
So does Trump not always tell the truth?
Well, let's ask an expert.
So I wrote up all of these findings
for the Washington Post in an op-ed titled I Study Liars.
I've never seen one like President Trump. At this point,
the first year of his presidency, he was telling
an average of about six lies a day.
And I thought that was remarkable.
You know, that was so much more than ordinary people.
He was just getting started for a grand total over the course
of his presidency, of 30,573
lies, flip flops, or misleading statements.
It's absolutely
astounding.
A lie happens any time you intentionally mislead someone.
So people lie for lots of reasons.
But ordinary people lie for two main reasons.
The first is, they lie to serve themselves.
They lie to get what they want,
to look better, to spare themselves
from embarrassment or shame or blame or anything negative.
So it's all about themselves.
They also lie to be nice to other people.
They lie to flatter other people,
to advantage them, to be kind to them, to spare them
from any embarrassment or conflict or anything else
other people don't want.
When I studied my ordinary people,
there was a category of a kind of lie
that hardly anyone told, and that was a cruel lie.
A lie told to be mean to someone else, to disparage them,
to make them look like a fool, to hurt them, to insult them.
The Atlantic magazine published
an article with the title
'The Cruelty is the Point.'
And so as we got to know Trump better,
we realized this is who he is.
The cruelty is the point.
I think one of the motivations
behind Trump's cruelty and his lies
is that he loves shock value.
And, it's not just that he's shocking people,
although that's a big part of it,
but that his followers love it.
Trump is just like,
here I am, I'm going to say whatever I want.
And if Trump is re-elected?
Oh my God!
Oh, that is so horrifying a prospect.
And I guess I would say, you know,
as if there were any limits before,
there wouldn't be any now.
But, I guess the one difference is that
I think, or at least hope, that the
media would be a little bit savvier.
I mean, I remember having,
you know, the networks on or CNN on
in the background when I was doing something, and they would
show shots of Trump's plane
arriving for one of his rallies.
This was before he was elected president.
You know, he had them twisted around his finger.
They gave him so much free media,
and they didn't know how to deal
with all these lies and this brazenness.
It even took them a while to call the lies, lies, right?
(brooding music)
So Trump's claim of being a germaphobe?
I'm also very much of a germaphobe,
by the way. Believe me.
Well, if you want my opinion.
(laughs)
(machine rising in tension)
(alarm sound)
(explosion)
Of course, the media had a field day
with the allegation.
(dramatic choral music)
(choral music crescendos)
Hey, ABC news, I'd like to ask you
about your big Russian pee pee party.
No, no, I am not talking about the pee pee...
(laughing)
because it didn't happen,
and it wasn't as cool as it sounds.
Next question.
Room 1101, the presidential suite of the Ritz Carlton Hotel.
I rented it. The room we've heard so much about.
And yet, no one has come to check it out.
I don't know why.
It's not even like it's in the past.
You're in history.
(laughing)
You're in it.
I'm saying the pee pee tape supposedly
took place on that bed is what I'm saying.
Pee pee tape, pee pee tape.
Roll 'em.
(sniggering)
(laughing)
I am Samantha Bee.
Welcome to Full Frontal.
Hallelujah! It's comedy Christmas!
Oh my God, oh my God, oh my God!
Il Duce likes to douse beds in floozy pee.
(laughing)
Of course, the true victim here is that memory foam mattress.
It... can't ever forget.
(indistinct dialogue) (laughing)
So how did the media handle the allegation?
Well, the media completely dropped
the ball with the issue of kompromat.
You're right, the salacious pee pee tape, you know, idea...
Whatever's on the tape,
the important thing is that our president
is compromised by a foreign adversary.
That's the important thing.
I don't care what's on the tape.
What I care about is that our
president is working for the enemy.
Christopher Steele
thinks he knows why nobody has seen the tape.
So how do you explain if that tape does indeed exist,
it hasn't been released?
Well, it hasn't needed to be released.
Why not?
Because I think the Russians felt they got
pretty good value out of Donald Trump..
when he was president of the U.S.
In 2019, a mysterious videotape appeared online.
The video escaped the attention of the media
except for one online magazine.
After an exhaustive review of the tape, Slate magazine
determined that it was a fake.
Probably.
The Senate Intelligence Committee
said that it was aware of a realistic
and well- resourced but fake video
of someone who looks like Trump.
The Senate never told us why they thought it was a fake.
The rest of the footnote in their report? It was redacted.
So why does Trump keep talking about the tape?
I'm not into golden showers...
The golden shower...golden
shower...golden showers as they say
they call them.
Trump does protest too much.
He keeps bringing up the pee pee tape.
Right.
If it were really just ridiculous like
you would just sort of dismiss it.
You wouldn't keep...
But again, everything with Trump is projection or confession.
You know? So the fact that he keeps bringing it up
is another one of the reasons to believe that it's true.
The fact that he keeps bringing it up to deny it.
Could the tape actually be real?
What might it look like?
(fanfare)
(urgent music)
Mr. Trump, welcome to Moscow!
Hi girls.
No one's taping this, right?
Don't worry. In Russia,
we would never tape anyone.
Everyone is free now,
anything goes.
Okay, great.
I like the sound of that.
Whoa! Who's that for, the Hulk?
Oligarchs.
They want much of everything.
Big mansions, big yachts, big party.
Hey, the oligarchs are welcome at Mar-A-Lago
any time Melania is away.
So that's the one?
That's the bed Obama slept in?
I'm supposed to believe that?
Yes.
Okay, good enough for me.
Let's get to it!
I am starting to like Russia.
Cloudy with a chance of rain, if you know what I mean.
Beautiful. Just beautiful.
Might have to move here.
Donald, take off your clothes.
Me? No way!
Oh, okay,
if you insist.
If I ever run for president
and this leaks out, it'll be political suicide.
Wait a minute, I know. I'll tell people I'm a germaphobe
who'd never do anything like this.
Genius!
Want to give it a try?
Don't have to ask me twice, girls.
Take that, Barack.
And this is for Michelle.
And once more for Barack.
Hey, I gotta tell my son Barney about this.
I mean Barron.
Now, on you!
Let it flow, ladies.
World class,
believe me.
Best flow job ever.
Wow, Melania will never believe this... luckily.
Next time, girls, how about a brown bath?
Ohh, I am so going to hell.
Okay, a little to the left, a little more.
Who am I kidding?
A lot more!
(liquid flowing) (gentle underwater sounds)
(liquid tension building) (liquid explosion)
Whoaa!
I love Russia!
The previous animation was fake.
Probably.
Many people have noted Trump's inability to criticize
Vladimir Putin and hypothesized as to why.
Also is a person that kills journalists, political opponents
and invades countries.
Obviously, that would be a concern, would it not?
He's running his country and at least he's a leader.
You know? Unlike what we have in this country.
He'd rather have a puppet as president
of the United States. - No puppet, no puppet.
- It's pretty clear... - You're the puppet.
It's pretty clear you won't admit
that the Russians have engaged in cyber
attacks against the United States of America.
That you encouraged espionage against our people,
that you are willing to spout the Putin line,
sign up for his wish list, break up
NATO, do whatever he wants to do,
and that you continue to get help from him
because he has a very clear favorite in this race.
I mean, I've been with Trump and Putin.
Trump is in awe of Putin.
He's... when you see Trump with
Putin, as I have on a few occasions,
he's like the 12 year old boy
that goes to high school and meets
the captain of the football team.
(laughing)
My hero.
I sadly beseech President Trump
to apologize to the American people for...
his disgraceful, dangerous, and damaging
behavior with Putin in Helsinki.
What was he afraid of?
President Trump, you first.
Just now, President Putin denied having anything to do
with the election interference in 2016. Every U.S.
intelligence agency has concluded
that Russia did. What, who...
my first question for you, sir, is who do you believe?
My second question is, would you
now, with the whole world watching,
tell President Putin, would you denounce what happened in 2016
and would you warn him to never do it again?
All I can do is ask the question.
My people came to me,
Dan Coats came to me and some others,
they said they think it's Russia.
I have President Putin.
He just said it's not Russia.
I will say this -
I don't see any reason why it would be.
I will tell you that President Putin
was extremely strong and powerful
in his denial today.
When they talked about did Russia collude?
He said, well, I don't you know, he denied it very strongly.
Denied it very strongly? What the hell is that?
I think it's bizarre.
I think when Trump was in Helsinki
and met with Putin and, you know, agreed with Putin.
I think it's just crazy and outrageous
that this guy's a bloodthirsty dictator.
This guy Putin, you know, he is a skilled KGB agent.
He basically is manipulating Trump to do his bidding.
Putin's influence on Trump is well known.
You just have to look at the pictures of the 2018 Helsinki
summit and see how subdued the normally
boisterous and belligerent Trump was,
to know who has the reins of power in that situation.
And Trump learned a lot as a propagandist
from the Kremlin playbook of propaganda.
Because the Kremlin model is
called the firehose of falsehood.
It is a high volume, constant spewing
not only of lies, but of doubt, of uncertainty.
And Trump is very open in his slavish admiration of Putin.
He'll always defend him, even
at a cost of criticizing the United States because
men like
Putin and Trump don't actually have
any respect for their own people
or their own country, which is
why they steal from their people,
they lie to their people.
And in Putin's case, they murder their own people.
And what they admire is raw power,
the ability to get away with crimes.
And so for Trump, Putin has been an enormous success,
and he would like to have some of that success himself.
Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen,
testified before Congress in 2018.
And in doing so, he provided one potential reason
why Trump refuses to criticize Putin.
I lied to Congress when Mr. Trump
stopped negotiating the Moscow Tower project in Russia.
(tense music)
I stated that we stopped
negotiating in January of 2016.
That was false.
Our negotiations continued
for months later during the campaign.
There were at least a half a dozen times
between the Iowa caucus in January of 2016
and the end of June
when he would ask me, how's it going in Russia?
Referring to the Moscow Tower project.
Mr. Trump knew of and directed the Trump Moscow negotiations
throughout the campaign and lied about it.
He lied about it because he never expected to win.
He also lied about it because he stood to make hundreds
of millions of dollars on the Moscow real estate project.
The fact that Trump was actively
discussing a deal for a Trump Tower Moscow
while he was running for president,
and telling the public
that he was not pursuing any kind of
deal with Russia, really demonstrates
that he was in an already-compromised position.
That's because he was telling the public one thing,
and Russia knew that what he was saying was a lie.
Which meant that they had the power to expose
him at any time and harm his electoral chances.
I continue to be fascinated
by the question around Trump's
loyalty to Vladimir Putin.
(brooding music)
There's many theories out there, whether he simply
likes the idea of a strong authoritarian leader,
whether he wishes he were like Putin, whether he wishes
America was more like Russia or not,
or whether that's mixed with his strong desire to do business
in Russia - well-established. Or whether or not it's linked
to numerous reports that Russia may have helped
pay off his debt, particularly
loans associated with Deutsche Bank.
Whether he's trying to curry favor and retain favor
with a government, a foreign government
he knows aided his campaign
or attempted to aid his campaign through Wikileaks' distribution
- through stealing communications at DNC,
ultimately going to Wikileaks, ultimately being used publicly.
All of this is likely the correct answer.
I think there is a host of factors
that give us a Donald Trump
who has wrapped himself around
Vladimir Putin to the point where he's unable
to honestly critique him and act in America's interest.
Trump continues to wink at Putin.
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!
And Putin keeps meddling.
This morning, the former FBI informant
accused of making false bribery claims
about President Biden and his son, Hunter,
has been released on bond.
Alexander Smirnoff is
seen here in the blue hoodie leaving
court in Las Vegas yesterday.
Smirnoff is charged with lying to the FBI, claiming the Bidens
accepted millions in bribes from
Burisma, a Ukrainian energy firm.
And the tape?
Nobody has seen it. So far. Does it exist? Hmm...
Well, if you find it, let me know.
Until then, only Putin knows for sure.
(brooding music)
I kind of believe in the pee pee tape.
I don't know if the tape's real or not.
I kind of hope it is, just 'cause that would be awesome.
But, till I see it,
no picture, no proof.
Is it really that far-fetched?
Anything is possible when it comes to the orange hobgoblin.