it s an easy call. the president if he has to tell his side of the story he should do so. tell the truth and to be done with it. what is your take about the steel dossier, if there are details in that dossier that s not true then it does matter very much who paid for it. when i talk to democrats it s almost the exclusion of all else. what they should talk about we know there were conversations between trump campaign officials and individuals working on behalf of the russian government. papadopoulos has pled guilty and we know there was the trump tower meeting. does it amount to full collusion and the president and his senior advisors wanted to reach out to russia quietly secretly during the transition and mike flynn lied about it.
do so. tell the truth and to be done with it. what is your take about the steel dossier, if there are details in that dossier that s not true then it does matter very much who paid for it. when i talk to democrats it s almost the exclusion of all else. what they should talk about we know there were conversations between trump campaign officials and individuals working on behalf of the russian government. papadopoulos has pled guilty and we know there was the trump tower meeting. does it amount to full collusion and the president and his senior advisors wanted to reach out to russia quietly secretly during the transition and mike flynn lied about it. the fact that the steel dossier has certain details that are correct, certain details that are not correct bears on the president s culpability. thank you so much.
suggest i suggesting that perhaps if coverage is something he does not find flattering because let s be honest, he s not talking about whether the media is being fair. he s upset with coverage that he does not find favorable towards him. that is not what he is entitled to and what the press is is asked to do. he has internal checks to make sure what it reports is true and factual. but beyond that, it doesn t have to be favorable. so this comment made about the ti time, even jokes he s made about trouble with reporters while standing next to fairly authoritarian foreign leaders have cracked down. it amount s s to a troubling sef comments that suggest he s going after n some ways, the freedom of the press. nbc news for their point says they had had three people inside the room and it was a very small meeting to relay that story. so as he s bashing the press
thought was central to the investigation. you could write a report without hearing everything that michael flynn has to say putting him under oath. he s been under investigation and invoked his fifth amendment rights. the communities are not inclined to give them. i don t know. i think this latest story by the journal which is quite fascinating on many levels only underscores the need to figure out way to question mike flynn about everything and anything. ken, the problem is it s all bunch of low level this and low level that people going after stuff. in the end, does it amount to a hill of beans. i m not defending anyone in this one. there seems to be a lot of circumsubstantial stuff that seems to imply russia was trying to get stuff. i got to agree with your
leaks could cover a huge range of things. is there s a neutral term, though i think the pro-trump camp is trying to in that sense, what james comey did does seem like a leak, because he put it out in a way that didn t let people know but terms it was not illegal. it did not contain classified information, he says, and if it doesn t contain information that s damaging to the country object could aid a foreign adversary, it s simply not illegal. what was that conversation? did it amount to obstruction of justice? maybe to comey is somehow a bad guy? to say this is equivalent to