asked him, he would not recommend a one-on-one meeting. we re now told the vice president of the a former indiana senator in the cabinet. there s been some talk in town because the president publicly jnd mined coats standing there next to coats in helsinki. that is one of our question at the moment, isn t it? we have been told that dan coats is not going to resign, he plans to stay in the position as long as he can. but then the president did an interview on wednesday where lespoke vele spole he spoke very highly of president. you heard dan coats, he said if the president had asked me, i would not have recommended they
negative coverage of the summit is the problem. saying essentially that the media either wants it fob a relationship with putin or a war. but those aren t necessarily the options, you don t have to be at war with them for confronting our election it. the president is framing it as the media doesn t want this, but simply the standard is pretty low for the president. but the president did not take that opportunity when he was explicitly given that opportunity by a reporter and you heard dan coats say yesterday when putin comes back this fall, that he does not think that he and the president should meet one-on-one again. the new york times reporting that the president s former personal attorney michael cohen, when still the president s personal attorney and personal fixer, two months before the election in 2016, secretly recorded then candidate
nature and is not reported subsequent. and then you could have a crime. as i say, we need more to look at this. if i were now counsel to the president, is whether jewel yampb any, by publicly discussing this conversation as the agent of the president now, has waved the attorney-client privilege. and may in fact by that published statement make it very, very easy now for prosecutors to say, this is an admissible item of evidence and because the attorney-client privilege had been waived. let s quickly go around the table and we know how when the white house enter into damage control mode, we now have giuliani who s your legal front person, what is the president going to do about this? paul makes a point about whether or not what giuliani has now said opens the door to use of this tape. but i think the big issue here as my colleagues mentioned is a
melania gave birth to barron trump. she sold her story to the national enquirer and they never published it. and the whole idea behind that is that the national enquirer is a friend of trump. michael cohen secretly taped trump sediscussing payment to t playboy model. we have learned in this universe, sometimes up is down and east is west. what do you make of this? i think if we had reason to believe skeptical about donald trump s denials in the past, the white house s denials in the past about these various stories, that the white house may have tried to kill, these affairs that a number of women have said they had a with donald trump several years ago, i think we have reason to be 100 times more skeptical. no matter what donald trump says now going forward, no matter
when they rated michael cohen s office and hotel and house. and now we can see why the president was so angry. and remember that these recordings now potentially mean that donald trump and the aides around him no longer can sort of get off on semantics, right? they can t explain away these things did or didn t happen and create explanations when there are literally recordings of these conversations taking place, because remember that s exactly what happened with the stormy daniels payment, donald trump was asked very directly, did you know about the payments, and he said no, but the later explanations that came in rudy giuliani, that came from the white house, he didn t know at the time, he eventually found out. if there were reportings and that makes that kind of argument and the semantics argument even more critical.