lukewarm investigation by the i.g. eric: maybe he wants a criminal investigation. if the i.g. comes up with evidence of crimes he is required to pass that evidence on to the prosecutors in the justice department. eric: what about the strzok text saying it was being run out of the white house? that seems to be a reference to the russia investigation. but could that jump the shark and be go beyond that? here is the other 64,000 dollar question. this is not my phrase but james freeman in this morning s new york times. where the heck was barack obama? what did president obama know about this? there is another peter strzok text. there are 5,000 and you can pick and choose. one another says the white house wants to know everything we re doing the f.b.i. is doing to surveil the trump campaign? wow. eric: could it be they re trying to find out what russia
himself or herself whether this information was credible, whether you needed to discount it, whether you needed to take it with a lot of grains of salt. that s the 64,000 dollar question here. eric: some say the political information should never have been involved in a law enforcement action. i talked to congressman mike turner from ohio. here is what he said. if this is okay, then donald trump can do this in our next campaign as he is going up for reelection. he can hire a foreign agent to look for dirt on his opponent and give that to the f.b.i. and have them enter into into evidence in a fisa court. it is wrong doesn t matter if it s hillary clinton or obama s administration or donald trump as our current president. it shouldn t happen ever. eric: just because it comes from a political source, does that make it wrong? are you hear me? if something comes from a political source, that doesn t mean you can never use it. what it does means, you have to
it is a criminal misdemeanor under a 2015 texas law as jesse noted to do this kind of thing. and if it was done with knowing intent, it was done to harm him or embarrass him and if he had as jesse said a reasonable expectation to privacy that this thing would remain private i think texas would have a pretty good chance. it would be the misdemeanor conviction punishable up to a year in jail and a 4,000 dollar fine not a felony. when one sends these type of pictures they put themselves in a compromising position. that notwithstanding, where is it? at some level the woman says i ll release this or else. that may be blackmail. or saying if you don t release it or you talk to people about it, i m going to report you to the police. that could be construed as blackmail as well. is it two wrongs here or does the tape come down on one side? the problem for this young
announcement? that s the 64,000 dollar question. i ve heard everything from as soon as today to perhaps sometime next week. maybe the white house wanting the president to keep it in his hip pocket as a nice send-off as he prepares to come back home. the name you re hearing a great deal about is joe lieberman, the connecticut politician who was a vice presidential candidate for the democratic party and ran as an independent after being booted from the party during the primary process. the timing. the president said this yesterday. we re very close to a new f.b.i. director. i do want to throw one last thing at you, bill. a top aide on the democratic side today saying that there couldn t be a worse time to take the unprecedented step of handing the f.b.i. over to a politician. so this won t necessarily be an easy selection even if the president decides to go that
to fry than this. bill: only two tweets today, too. maybe you are getting your desire there. nice to see you karl rove there in austin, texas. abby: thank you, bill. the white house signaling it may be open to reconsidering controversial advisor steve bannon s place on the national security council. it is up to h.r. mcmaster the president s new national security advisor. kevin cork is live from the north lawn. will bannon remain on the committee? the 64,000 dollar question. i think you hit the nail on the head. it will be the president s call ultimately but also his national security advisor s call. now that he has this newly minted national security advisor general mcmaster some people are wondering what will happen with steve bannon? will he stay on the committee, not say on the committee? let me share this. press secretary sean spicer was asked that question yesterday.