david is following the story. pro-choice groups are watching this one closely concerned about what happened in that small alabama town and what it could mean on a larger scale. one pro-choice group sent out an email just this evening and said, quote, alarm bells should be ringing. another called in a very scary case but here s what is really going on in this alabama case. here is the complaint. it is 11 pages, interventions ryan major. he and his girlfriend conceived in early february 2017. by february of that year there was abortion, majors sue the abortion clinic on behalf of himself and the unborn fetus, 6 weeks old, majors petition to represent the state of the unborn fetus, the estate, i should say, called baby row and this document but a probate judge signed off to allow majors to represent the estate of baby row. majors s attorney is in alabama. to my knowledge, never has an
politics for democrats not to call their investigations and impeachment drive right now. to do so would hand the g.o.p. a gift as a claim that it is already in. you have several congressmen who have come out and said they believe the president has obstructed justice, the prestatements prior to the issue of this. it s interesting, what kristin was talking about earlier with the president s strategy to this, he is citing president obama s executive privilege, that is something that did not work out for president obama when he cited executive privilege when it came to the fast and furious case. it is setting down for a big showdown with the white house. shannon: they tweeted this today about all these requests, special counsel mueller has had resources that go far beyond what is available to the congressional committee. if mueller finds no collusion, is it likely shiff and his boiler will be able to, julian? there s a lot to unpack here, but the question on
thing here, they shouldn t try to muddy the waters. they shouldn t try to muddy the waters and confusion it by lumping it in with everything else. i agree with that, i want to add, we are all against anti-semitism. why hasn t come up this week? it s coming up for a very specific reason, and if they clouded the issue, it is not going to send the message to her and to her supporters, saying, this is absolutely unacceptable. there is a terrible thing sleeping in on the left, that the left has got to stop. in order to save itself. they are saying, look, what steve king did was much worse. what president trump did by saying there s good people on both sides, the both sides argument, which was much worse. that might be the case but i disagree, both are very problematic, steve king in particular was very bigoted and what he said, but that is besides the point. we should announce those things when they occur on the political right, but when they occur on the political left, the left has
show, congress could look at a whole host of other reforms, looking at enforcement on the emoluments clause, a statutory basis for prosecution of a president when he leaves office. you are talking with the 100 contacts that had with the russians in the campaign and transition, sharing of intelligence information, the trump team meeting with russian officials. he shannon: all things the special counsel is looking at. but there is a reason for congress to have a separate process. one is because it may be looking at legislative reform. at two s if you re to do something, ultimately a decision of prosecution of the present or somebody else, impeachment, something else, if you make a public case on this. the federalist papers 65 were very instructive on the subject of impeachment from a political question for me to make a political case to the body politic any public paired shannon: a number of democrats including the judiciary committee saying making a public record because i m to co
to the president. in both cases, it is clear that these things could both be a matter of inexperience, it could be a matter of ineptitude, but because of our political system, both have become high-profile cases and she is also in hot water for something similar come herself. one thing we agree on probably is what is and is not a campaign finance violation is notoriously vague. poorly defined, sometimes defined by the fec violations, possibly unconstitutional for vagueness. michael: probably would never have been convicted by a jury because the law is that ambiguous on the hush money. shannon: there are cases that show that is a mass and something we need more. we are long overdue for a clarification of what is and is not a camping violation. shannon: i m sure the congresswoman doesn t want to be subject of that case bear the president pushing back as he says this is a disgrace, an