with russia. we got roger stone, for example, who said he talked to wikileaks, he predicted the modesta e-mails, said he was in direct communication with gucifer, too. again, i don t know where all this leads. but if the white house has any credibility at all and they want to remove this cloud, they ought to support our investigation so we can get to the bottom of it. can you imagine? i m speculating here with you, you have been through this. if you had campaign contributions coming in people helping europe campaign as volunteers, say, working hours after hours for your campaign. you got people like that. you met with him, you never thanked him. is it even plausible that the trump people didn t thank the russians for helping them? it even imaginable, hey, thanks, buddy, it s been very helpful. we like the way you have done this. we will remember this later. excuse me, it doesn t sound right. it doesn t sound right. it doesn t sound right that then
shannon: and these days, i feel like all of us have to be super skeptical, richard. when something passes on the wires, the a.p. we generally believe it and respect it. even we had to hesitate and say something about this just doesn t sound right. how important is it for the media to have that sniff test to think about it, or do you think, would you admit, there is some motivation to, anything that sounds negative or crazy for this administration, some people want to run with it? this is a tough, tough place for the media and the white house. here s the truth. the truth is that the job of the media is to report information. if they received what seems to be some sort of leaked document they have a responsibility to release that to their viewers. but without backtracking wait a second, i was going to say, with that being said there should be double sourcing and triple sourcing. the a.p. didn t do it in this particular situation, unfortunately. this brings to us a larger proble
shannon: and these days, i feel like all of us have to be super skeptical, richard. when something passes on the wires, the a.p. we generally believe it and respect it. even we had to hesitate and say something about this just doesn t sound right. how important is it for the media to have that sniff test to think about it, or do you think, would you admit, there is some motivation to, anything that sounds negative or crazy for this administration, some people want to run with it? this is a tough, tough place for the media and the white house. here s the truth. the truth is that the job of the media is to report information. if they received what seems to be some sort of leaked document they have a responsibility to release that to their viewers. but without backtracking wait a second, i was going to say, with that being said there should be double sourcing and triple sourcing. the a.p. didn t do it in this particular situation, unfortunately. this brings to us a larger proble
as far as the general is concerned, when i first heard about it, i said, that doesn t sound right. my counsel came, white house counsel, and he told me, and i asked him, and he can speak very well for himself, he said he doesn t think anything is wrong, really didn t think it was really what happened after that, but he didn t think anything was done wrong. i didn t either because i waited a period of time and started to think about it. to me, he was doing the job. the information was provided by, who i don t know, sally yates. i was a little surprised because i said, that doesn t sound like he did anything wrong there. but he did something wrong with respect to the vice president, and i thought that was not acceptable. as far as the actual making the call in fact, i ve watched various programs and read
california and new york, where there was a different margin and where clearly hillary clinton won the popular vote. so it s yet to be seen how this is all going to play out, anderson. pam brown, appreciate it. with us, kirsten powers, kaley mcan any, margaret hoover, and jonathan taseeny. kirsten, it s interesting to hear the president i would have no problem with investigation to fix any problems in the voting system, if there s a lot of dead people on rolls, if there s people registered in multiple states. that is not voter fraud, which is what the president is alleging, massive three to five million illegally voting, it would be the biggest voter fraud ever. we have to think about what it would take to get people to show up and pretend to be those dead people. that s what it would have to take. and i think it s confusing to a lot of people who are watching. they hear dead people on the voter rolls and they think something smells, it doesn t sound right. but then someone has