arizona and spoke with loretta lynch and she had to recuse herself from anything having to do with the fbi investigation of hillary clinton and the server. they were very critical of that. now this is a conversation, they re not saying the conversation didn t take place between reince priebus and the deputy at the fbi. that s right, poppy. and that conversation that took place on that airport tarmac in phoenix, arizona, back during the summer, was regrettable, only because it raised an appearance issue. but i think a lot of the criticisms that ensued after that meeting took place, some of it was justified, because there was an appearance issue there. but at the very least you did not have any actual conversation about the ongoing case. here, by the white house s own admission, you have a conversation that was directly about a matter where the white house is itself under investigation. brian, i just want your take, the white house says this morning, it wasn t about the substance, it
you help g.m. took billions of taxpayers hard earned dollars in the auto bailout and you can remember they had to ditch their private planes. they cried about that. but they are back in the skies on private chartered planes to promote the public stock offerings. and jow we have the director of political reform at the center for governmental studies. nice to see you this morning. this sounds like it s just going back to the old ways for g.m. this is what got them in the trouble in the first place, spending money, could we bail them out in the future? well, that s the whole problem with this action. it s an appearance issue. g.m. has bought themselves a world of bad p.r. doing this. it could be that because they need the private jets to reach clients to make their case for the public offering, it s good
saying that the president should be exempt from time consuming and distracting lawsuits. that does not only apply, i might add, to this question of mueller, but it also might apply to civil lawsuits like summer zervos, who is suing the president. this has implications for him. you can be sure that it s going to be really central to democratic questioning of kavanaugh when he appears before congress. and to your point on recusal, it is true that three justices on the court were appointed by nixon and ultimately ruled in that case, but none of them were none was appointed during the time of the litigation. that s true. so this is where i say there s an appearance issue. this is during active litigation where the person who may be the subject of the decision is appointing you. that creates an appearance to me that i think kavanaugh has to be very sensitive to.
power. when it comes to the question that michael was talking about, about a potential subpoena here, you do have a nominee, whether it s before conversion or after conversion, who is on the record saying that the president should be exempt from time consuming and distracting lawsuits. that does not only apply, i might add, to this question of mueller, but it also might apply to civil lawsuits like summer zervos, who is suing the president. this has implications for him. you can be sure that it s going to be really central to democratic questioning of kavanaugh when he appears before congress. and to your point on recusal, it is true that three justices on the court were appointed by nixon and ultimately ruled in that case, but none of them were none was appointed during the time of the litigation. that s true. so this is where i say there s an appearance issue.