their insistence that we have - the president cognitively assessed, which we did in- as you know, he passed with with flying colors. and , you know, this is kind of where this all originated. i tweetin i sawaw that one day when i was driving to a campaign event that ronald mcdonald put out with some of, these gaffes and one in particular a, i think was where he thought he was running for r the senate and he can remember which state he was in. i don t remember. and you know, she sta tweeted ot a video of it and i just i was a little frustrated with the double standard and i just replied to the tweet. . just retweetedd i said, wow, does anybody remember the cognitive test that i gave at donald trump, the one that he aced? looks like somebody else needs to test. scary. that was it.. that was a pretty benign tweet overall. yn tthat s all i said. within twenty minutes, dana, i got a scathing email from president obama just ripping me apart, telling me, you know, it and the office that i ha
you can t be treated like any other yellow springs yan if you go to the microphone and say i m dave chapelle i have million millions of dollars and will will put pull it. thanks, good to see. you thanks. from covid misinformation to the n. word joe rogan no stranger to terrors. my next guest sayso says it s not about cancelling him but exposing what he is all about. ne not-so-pretty stuff going on inside. it s true, with diabetic retinopathy, my next guest saysyso says it s not about cancelling him but exposing what he is all about. o. my nexext guest sayso says it s not about cancelling him b but exposing what he is all about. n. my next guest sayso says it s not about cancelling him but exposing what he is all about. t. my next guest sayso says it s not about cancelling him but exposing what he is all about. r. my next guest sayso says it s not about cancelling him but exposing what he is all about. o. my next guest sayso says it s not about cancelling him but exposing what he
everyone, the aftermath costing hamilton the lead when they got back to the grid. verstappen was at the front this time, but the restart lasted less than a lap before they restopped. another pause to raise the tension, with verstappen back in front, the pair almost touched. seconds later, they definitely did. commentator: 0h, they touched and they collided! an incident that cost verstappen the lead, a penalty and ultimately the race. hamilton s victory in the craziest of circumstances. i the craziest of circumstances. didn t understand wi bra kes i didn t understand why he hit the brakes quite heavily and then i ran into the back of them and then he may have done so i didn t understand what was going on so i understood afterwards he was going to let us past. i afterwards he was going to let us ast. , ., afterwards he was going to let us ast, , ., ., afterwards he was going to let us ast. , ., ., ., ., past. i slowed down. i wanted to let him b . past. i slowed down. i wanted to let h
president of the united states, need to do with the office of management and budget? well, that goes to one of the central questions in this entire alleged plot, which was was rudy giuliani illicitly involved in extorting a favor? why we have any contact with omb. i think about bill taylor having that video link conference call about the security aide and saying that there was something from omb in the room off camera who said we ve been told by the chief of staff who was told by the president, to withhold the security aid. why would rudy giuliani, who s not a member of the government, is the president s personal attorney, is there any legitimate reason for him b to be on the phone with an omb official? you re asking exactly the right question. he doesn t have lines of authority. the omb deals with government matters of a highly sensitive nature. hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid and rudy giuliani making these calls and reading again here from this report, this is new
and today, he was repeatedly confronted with those words in an interview and insisted he was being miscoop strewed. one of the things you said just a few seconds ago, never use that language. there is not a quid pro quo. you were asked by jonathan carl, you described it and you said it happens all the time. again, reporters will use their language all the time. my language never said quit pro quo. look at the list of three things. things that it was legitimate for the president to do. and in that very interview, one of those three things he named once again was again the president s interest in this investigation into 2016 matters related to the democratic national committee. now mick mulvaney s defense it seems, the latest twist, appears to be saying look, i didn t use the words quid pro quo, even if that is what he admitted to. so what more do we know about these threats of some you know machinery behind him b about