about an ongoing criminal investigation could not be investigated. and studies suggested that congress should pass a law to protect sitting presidents from civil suits and criminal prosecution. here is what president trump s lawyer rudy giuliani told sean hannity in may. the president cannot be distracted by a criminal investigation. you can always prosecute him after, they can get him when he leaves the white house. rudy and brett have the same speech writer. i am joined by senator amy. outside attorney and fixer, and the guy he just nominated. they both say the president should be left alone by
house you heard the sound bites. you saw the statement from his own lawyers. they lied. does that concern you? look, they could go on with the investigation. what i was concerned most about like most americans was there any collusion. there was no collusion. intended to keep it. then he met the love of his life. who came with a three foot, two inch bonus. for this new stepdad, it s promising to care for his daughter as if she s his own. every way we look out for those we love is an act of mutuality. we can help with the financial ones. learn more or find an advisor at massmutual.com we can help with the financial ones. directv now gives you more for your thing. get all the good stuff about tv without all the bad stuff. yes! you can still stream your favorite shows. yes! with no annual contract. wait, what? it s live tv. yes! with no satellites. what? and no bulky hardware. no bkydwe!
contentious or novel theory than even the one jonathan is talking about which as he said is an honest debate because frankly it s much more likely presidents will face this question then we ll have a president murder somebody in office, one hopes. we hope. hold your breath. listen the question i guess is can the president of the united states do anything that would amount to obstruction of justice or by virtue of the fact that he s the head of the executive branch, is anything fair game? if the justice department is investigating his family, if ey re preparing to move in an antitrust decision against one of his companies, does he have the ability unilaterally to shut down any investigation, to fire people if he doesn t get what he wants? could he bribe somebody? could he pay a federal official to shut down an investigation? and what we don t see here is we don t see what the bright line would be under the president s
explore if the president if the justice department really is, quote unquote, a creature of the president. instances like the president bullying amazon or the president, as he did during his campaign, threatening to block the at&t merger. so, this letter, if this truly is the way that the president views his executive power, is troubling on many levels beginning with the implications for this investigation but having far more reaching implications like i just outlined. so i want i understand that republicans and democrats on capitol hill watch this show a good bit. a lot of times in the gym, hi, how are y all doing? i want you to see the graphic at the bottom because this is what rudy giuliani said this weekend. rudy giuliani who is speaking on behalf of the president, who is speaking with the president s blessings and hasn t been called back for saying this, parallels
theory. well, there s a good reason. there is no line. well, that s right. the president could tell me your reading of the memo. the president could have handed a million dollars in cash to the russian foreign minister and said please take this back to vlad and tell him i want to build a trump tower in moscow to be caught on camera and according to this argument the president couldn t be indicted for that. so the indictment question is the one jonathan was talking about. and the couldn t even investigate that if he decided to shut it down. and if he decided to let s say they open an investigation into bribery and treason, right? and for that conversation the president would have the right to shut it down or do anything he wants to end that investigation into himself and there would be no obstruction of justice. it s a novel it s an extremely novel theory and they don t establish any limits for it so his argument is there s no reason to have an obstruction of