TITLE: Mueller Announces New Trump Cabinet Interview That Has Donald In Full Freakout
SENTENCE 1: ‘The White House turned over records this fall to special counsel Robert Mueller revealing that in the very first days of the Trump presidency, Don McGahn researched federal law dealing both with lying to federal investigators and with violations of the Logan Act, a centuries-old federal law that prohibits private citizens from negotiating with foreign governments, according to three people with direct knowledge of the confidential government documents.’  While it may have taken nearly three weeks for Flynn’s crimes to be addressed by the White House by firing him, it only took five days for Yates herself to be fired after warning McGahn about Flynn.
SENTENCE 2: Witness interviews included even members of the president’s most inner circle, as well as interviews of witnesses to the acts that to even the most untrained eye appear to constitute obstruction by the president.
SENTENCE 3: ‘Flynn’s tenure in the White House and his firing by Trump are among the topics Mueller’s team has been asking witnesses to discuss, and they are likely to be part of any questioning of the president.

Bias label: slightly
Annotator rationales:
If the text describes the Logan Act as a ‘centuries-old’ law, then it risks framing it as outdated or irrelevant without addressing its potential modern-day applicability.
If the text highlights Don McGahn researching laws about lying and the Logan Act, then it risks implying that these actions were directly tied to suspicious behavior without providing explicit evidence.
if the text attributes the claim to ‘three people with direct knowledge,’ then it risks relying on anonymous sources, which may undermine the credibility of the information.
If the text refers to Flynn’s actions as ‘crimes’ before legal proceedings conclude, then it risks prejudging his guilt and influencing readers' perceptions.
if the text emphasizes the timing of Yates’s firing, then it risks implying causation (that she was fired specifically for warning McGahn) without providing direct evidence.
If the text claims that the acts appear as obstruction even to an ‘untrained eye,’ then it risks oversimplifying a complex legal concept and influencing readers to prematurely conclude guilt.
If the text lists Flynn’s firing as a key topic for Mueller’s investigation, then it risks focusing disproportionately on one individual without addressing broader patterns of conduct.
If the text speculates about what will likely be asked during questioning of the president, then it risks spreading unverified assumptions about the investigation’s focus.