kushner, paul manafort, and a russian lawyer. so let s discuss now. democratic congressman mike quickly is here. i appreciate you joining us. i know that you re very busy. so if the report from the hill is correct, is it correct that your committee is preparing to subpoena phone records linked to the june 2016 trump tower meeting? is that correct? i cannot comment on specific subpoenas that may or may not happen. i will tell you, it is the kind of communication that we re going to be interested in. i think what s fair and important for us to move forward is all communications between trump associates and the russian contacts. and that goes way beyond the phone records, all the other apps and social media platforms in which they were communicating. the fact that we couldn t do that in the last two years under republican control, where they tanked the investigation then shut it down, made the investigation nearly impossible and it made the questioning of
but sometimes when you have something in your head, that is the only solution, which is what i think in this case, this person has, he won t listen to anything else. he was in that room to make his point, to sell his project. and i was in that room along with another hundred people, asking for answers that will defeat gun violence. he had five minutes to make his point, according to the rules in the room. for me, those were five minutes that we wasted. and this is an emergency. we need to make sure that every minute counts. we need to work faster than he s planning to work. he s part of that committee. and i m disappointed about that because i don t see him qualified for that. you said he was trying to sell his point. you have called him, respective salesperson, with no
but sometimes when you have something in your head, that is the only solution, which is what i think in this case, this person has, he won t listen to anything else. he was in that room to make his point, to sell his project. and i was in that room along with another hundred people, asking for answers that will defeat gun violence. he had five minutes to make his point, according to the rules in the room. for me, those were five minutes that we wasted. and this is an emergency. we need to make sure that every minute counts. we need to work faster than he s planning to work. he s part of that committee. and i m disappointed about that because i don t see him qualified for that. you said he was trying to sell his point. you have called him, respective
they have a world of expertise in the countries that we re concerned about. can i ask yes? reportedly, the president is furious, really mad about this. why do you think he s so mad? you know, i think the president is showing flashes of desperation. the fact that you would hire career professionals to do the work of the house intellect committee on intelligence, shouldn t concern the president of the united states. i think some of the people we re talking about are career workers who were involved in the obama administration. i think to believe the president and any of his concerns are to believe some sort of deep-state conspiracy. we re not he s implying that they re snatching people from his inner circle who are going to reveal critical information about the president of the united states. yeah. it s simply not true. it s the committee doing its work, bringing on qualified people. representative mike quigley, i appreciate your time. thank you. thank you. take care.
and really, the closest we came to that were some of what we ve seen reported and particularly the unredacted portions that were mistakenly revealed by manafort s attorneys about his dealings with kilimnik, where, for example, he was giving internal polling data to kilimnik. i ll tell you this doesn t surprise me. what i m interested in, whether reading a report or seeing in charges, what more there was in terms of the dealings between manafort and kilimnik. thank you, gentlemen, i appreciate it. president is furious the house intelligence committee hired former national security counsel staffers. a member of that committee, congressman mike quigley, responds next. is that for me? mhm aaaah! nooooo. nooooo.