what we know now is that he told the house intelligence committee that he went there to moscow and did have a meeting in 2016. with the deputy director of the country. how did he meet with the deputy head of the country if he wasn t there as a surrogate for trump. hasn t he had a long history of involvement with russia? can we make any assumption that he did that because of history? he says he did not go there on any official he can say what he wants. it will be proven in court what happened. look, there s been i ve said this so many times. i work in politics on the inside and covering politicians for 50 years almost now and i have never met a russian. these the proliferation of russian personalities in this carbon monoxide pain fr campam manafort to flynn to him, why were there so many meetings. what was kislyak doing at the republican convention, changing the ukraine plank in the platform. all of this russia, russia, russia. what is it about? trump was asking the russi
it can be just the opposite. that s what we have seen since trump s election. we talked about the coalition of minorities, the growing coalition of minorities that might well lead to a democratic majority in the electoral college being pretty firm. well, now we can see where potentially, possibly trump and the republicans could solidify their gains in 2020 and beyond. that s jumping way ahead. when you ve got a popularity rating in the 30s, seeking re-election won t be easy. but clearly, you know, our views of the electorate and elections changed a lot because of the shock that everybody got last november. polls and projections and the way they are conducted now, has that all changed? i mean nobody saw what was coming from polling numbers. there were some that were saying, look, we re out in the field, we re not seeing a lot of enthusiasm on the democratic side for voters. but in terms of polling and prediction numbers, have we
officials it becomes a problem. the only defense for the president is none of my advisers knew what they were talking about and it s kind of a sham. doesn t seem like a good defense for them. i want to ask both of you. what dpo yo you think is most damaging of papadopoulos testimony and working potentially with robert mueller? i think the most damaging thing is he sat at a table with president trump and said i told everybody we were talking with the russians. and the conversations continued and left that room. that right there puts donald trump and jeff sessions in a room where contact with russia was discussed. whether or not there is collusion, that is the bayist of something bad for them. do you agree or something else? i think there is additional that s true but we now know that he was arrested a couple of months ago we don t know how much he s been cooperating with mueller since then. so if he has documents, recordings, memos, if he has a
russia involving carter page and papadopoulos. is he in legal jeopardy now or do you think he can make the case that he honestly didn t recall all of those contacts, that s something that he has said thus far. how far can he actually get with that defense? you mean the plea of insanity or memory loss? my sources in washington are suggesting the following. carter page is linking sessions on a regular basis with meetings with the russians. that will give trump the opportunity to fire sessions. that was the same reasons that trump fired flynn. once sessions is gone, trump can appoint a new attorney general who can fire mueller. that seems to be the scenario that i m hearing about and makes a lot of sense to me. okay. elise, i want to take a look at this new article you have out which says mueller s team is, quote, the iceberg on the horizon of trump s titanic. wow. and you discuss really the potential fallout for trump loyalists. what are you predicting here? i am predicting that pu
watch the president who will be boarding the plane and taking off for japan shortly. elise, there is a new book detailing sharp rebukes of the president by presidents bushes, 41 and 43. the elder bush saying during a 2016 interview that i don t like him. i don t know much about him but i know he s a blowhard and i m not too excited about him being a leader. how are republicans going to interpret those comments? i think that president bush is saying just stating the obvious and everyone knows it and republicans who aren t morally bankrupt should have long addressed the moral bankruptcy of donald trump. it s completely unsurprising that a man who is as warm and compassionate and who has dedicated his life to service the way that president bush has, that he does not approve of this current president s constant bullying. right. yeah. you re nodding, peter. i completely agree. and the great thing about bush