Their attacks were purely, purely political. The number one of the truth. We have real evidence the fbi uncovered a russian plot we have real evidence. Bribery, extortion, blackmail, money laundering, racketeering. They knew in 2009. One year before Hillary Clinton and Obama Administration approved this corrupt uranium one deal. What weve learned this week is that the fbi, the Department Of Justice, all new in 2009 that this was happening inside our country. They did nothing to stop it. The same democrats come at the same Media Outlets that were screaming bought a murder for a year, lying to you every day about donald trump, i getting next tos story. Keep in mind we have an fbi informant in this case who infiltrated this Putin Network right here in america. He has evidence, emails, personal recordings. Documents. Insider knowledge of all this. That Americas National security was, in fact, compromised at the highest level. Our country was sold out right in front of our faces. They let
was about, a, heat the detention is the point, be, light. exposing something for the american people, a government reform and really changing something or d all of the above. i would say, d all of the above. this was a multi hour testimony and you saw every angle. you saw certain people that were really concerned about the civil liberties aspect and the legal fisa warrants and a concern of having the reforms that christopher wray put in on the pfizer ward search systems actually worked. and then you had other people trying to get their ten seconds of fame and hammer him over issues that he had nothing to do with. you ve got to understand that he s running an agency with tens of thousands of people. and if one field office sends a memo of attacking catholic parents on their own accord and he thinks it s crazy, somehow now he has to respond to that in congress. so some of it was clearly bad faith and some of it was concerned about civil liberty issues. agreed, all of the above.
goes through the rigor of making a potential identification it has been. reviewed and once the peer-reviewed analyst says i concur that it has to go through a supervisor. there s a lot of rigor attached, so much that our police commission voted in a majority to support our use of the technology. the congresswoman remains unconvinced. there are a lot of questions and civil liberty issues but james craig, thank you for coming to tell us your side of the story and thank you to you men and women serving on the front lines. . check out this nailbiting footage, coast guard aircrew rescuing two hikers, one suffered an ankle injury and two
decision not to use the term terrorist to refer to organizations in the united states because as joyce pointed out, these civil liberty issues. the result is the word terrorist which really frightens americans for understandable reasons doesn t get applied as frequently to people based on the united states where the muslim portion of the american population is comparatively small. as a result, we don t use that word which has a lot of con no ta power to refer to people who commit crimes like this. the result of course is this coverage that often feels extraordinarily uneven. joyce, one of the points that also you brought up and one of the legal aspects and also a statistic that was brought up by a social policy and understanding, the use of weapons of mass destruction which is sometimes akin being used in terrorism cases, are you
showed. in santa cruz there s citizens cleaning up. there s glass and metal straws. you don t want to live next to a landfill. tucker: the state is becoming a landfill. i m not for pollution and not for litter. i sense irony in the state of california which is filthy and covered with litter and from homeless people and there illegally punishing waiters giving straws when homeless people put trash everywhere. it is everywhere. it is a problem. those are again separate issues. there s civil liberty issues in teams of taking things away from homeless people. tucker: why not imprison a waiter who makes 9 dollars an