also we know it included the apparent poster child for money laundering in u.s. banks, a dual national named ike, forgive me, kavalatze, maybe? maybe that s how you say it? he reportedly was there as a representative of the putin-linked oligarch who trump had meetings with in russia who publicist set up the meeting and we re told the oligarch s publicist was there as well. you take all of that together and that means, a, the clown car is getting very crowded. b, there s an interesting question as to why the our understanding of this meeting, why all of these names are rolling out so slowly over time. it was four people in the meeting and then five people in the meeting and then six people in the meeting and then seven people in the meeting, including the guy with the military intelligence background. now it s eight people in the meeting. including the money laundering guy. if this is in fact the last name we re going to get in terms of
leadership and comes back or one of the points where we separate ourselves from everybody else. that is part of why you have seen the business executives arguing with president trump on this point. and what about though, and also, forgive me, david chalian was on my brain as he should be at all times as the brilliant political advice, but i was thinking of the point he made this morning, but gloria, one thing that if you have had a president with a successful honeymoon period, and done a lot to appease the base, and legislative accomplishments and then decided to go against the grain, and then have the u.s. pull out of the paris agreement, but he needs the base, and this is the political imperative and so why would he do something that is so politically dangerous? well, you know, his base, you know, the concerns of his base voters are not the paris accord. the concerns are jobs. if the president is going to be using the argument that stephen moore used to you before that this is a
armada. exactly. these are our serious times. these are tremendous issues. and to have someone like that bumbling his way through, you know, what ought to be a substantive discussion is not reassuring. on the nationalist front, i have this to show you gentlemen. the new york post published tonight an interview with president obama about bannon. quote, president trump, forgive me. i have obama p r from the last segment. i like steve, but you have to remember he was not involved in my campaign until very late. where have we heard that before? i had already beaten all the senators and all the governors, and i didn t know steve. i m my own strategist, the president goes on. shades of the manafort defense. well, you never want your boss to say, i like so and so but. you also don t want to be in a conflict with a family member because family always wins. these are pretty simple points. that was certainly not a
south of mass deportation, to the economy, to gang violence, it would compound the problem, make it a bigger tea kettle just boiling away down there and he understands that. if anybody brings that unique perspective, it is john kelly who has been working with governments down there, with the military down there, conducting joint operations for years. i think that unique experience he brings is going to be invaluable in this new job. ben what do you think? sorry, sorry, forgive me, sean spicer and the white house. ready, john? whenever you re ready, we ll kick you off. actually i was thinking about not doing a briefing and i saw reince priebus and steve bannon talk and i figured they were infringing on my record. we have to keep up on my record.
steps back, if we can just for a second, julie, and first of all, the headline. the cia has concluded that russia intervened in the presidential election to help trump win. this is an explosive allegation. it really is. obviously, during the campaign we had reports from intelligence agencies that russia was interfering in the election, but to go this extra step and say they were doing that on behalf of donald trump, i think, is really troubling if you re someone who cares about the integrity of american elections. that s what you re hearing both from democrats and some republicans now, that this really isn t about the outcome of this election, it s not about challenging this outcome. it s about protecting our elections going forward. if russia was interfering on behalf of a specific candidate in 2016, what s to prevent them from doing that in the future if we don t get a handle on how this happened. let me pause and correct myself if i said cia. of course, dave, forgive me, fbi. i