campaign and nobody says they are major players. trying to find out what somebody might have whispered to them in a drunken conversation. for people to say, like chuck schumer, it s irresponsible to allow these people to find out who has infiltrated your campaign. if anyone infiltrated chuck schumer s campaign, they wouldn t say the fbi was allowed to have their sources. i don t blame president trump for being outraged, to find out what was going on are not going on with this cambridge professor. i don t blame him for finding out carter page, and caputo, what was happening with these guys. the only thing at stake is his presidency and how long he stay stays. dana: juan, let me ask you. the idea that if the deep state, if we are calling it back, was so determined to hurt president trump, what about the democrats feeling like they
and he said this publicly. he said no, it is going to involve the clinton foundation. if you look, wikileaks did not release anything involving. i have never spoken to roger about podesta s e-mail the fact that you had this conversation, you can see why that is a big glaring blinky light. and once again, i think that it is good that i was called into the senate because i was put on a list by adam schiff in the house. yes, fine, i will go because in the interest of america if they don t find any direct collusion which may be there was, i don t believe there was. but if they don t find direct collusion between the trump campaign and the russians we should wine this up. caputo did set down with the
so what happened between the voluntary and the grand jury. voluntary, they knew the answer, they want to test your veracity. in the voluntary, there was some insight by me given. when i went to the grand jury, there were things that i told them. they just want facts, facts, what i knew. given that caputo as of a few weeks says that the special counsel is focused on collusion. can you rule out the possibility that they didn t find anything. i don t know if any collusion at all and by the way, i don t know how we define collusion here too. is collusion that the trump campaign talked to julian assange? we don t know if there was collusion. i doubt that they did because vladimir putin would be too part to directly collude with the trump campaign. let me ask you something about your view. you just told the washington examiner you said if somebody s s stinks, somebody s s stinks. and the president s s stinks. can you explain to me in relatively terms what you mean when you say the pr
special counsel and he left convinced that they are focused on the collusion. a lot of questions. and he says they have more information about the trump campaign. was that your experience? so what happened between the voluntary and the grand jury. voluntary, they knew the answer, they want to test your veracity. in the voluntary, there was some insight by me given. when i went to the grand jury, there were things that i told them. they just want facts, facts, what i knew. given that caputo as of a few weeks says that the special counsel is focused soon collusi. can you rule out the possibility that they didn t find anything. i don t know if any collusion at all and by the way, i don t know how we define collusion here too.
that is a big glaring blinky light. and once again, i think that it is good that i was called into the senate because i was put on a list by adam schiff in the house. yes, fine, i will go because in the interest of america if they don t find any direct collusion which may be there was, i don t believe there was. but if they don t find direct collusion between the trump campaign and the russians we should wine this up. caputo did set down with the special counsel and he left convinced that they are focused on the collusion. a lot of questions. and he says they have more information about the trump campaign. was that your experience?