i ve got to wonder, is there a real danger to someone like michael cohen, who has been not just cooperative, but an advocate in this case? well, i think absolutely, it s reasonable to be concerned that there is. one in another trial in new york, the carroll trial, we had the judge ruled this past week, the jurors be kept anonymous. because of concerns about their safety, and all the risk that in that trial. again, trump s party that. when you look at trump s past behavior, when you look at the way he s spoken about his enemies, it s absolutely in the past created threats of violence. i think there s every reasonable expectation that, as he continues to move down the path of criminal exposure, as he looks at the potential indictment in new york, in georgia, potentially in the federal system, in washington d.c.. his past behavior about raging against prosecutors and investigators have every expectation that that s going to continue, and will increase.
along with documents and communications from his office. how much is this testing the limits of congressional oversight powers? what do you think you and your democratic colleagues can do about? there certainly the fine line between oversight and actually trying to get involved in a legal case. and the judicial system. the fact that our chairman james comer and even kevin mccarthy, the speaker, essentially calling for investigating the manhattan da, in the office. is completely unacceptable. but we are trying to interject themselves into what was a very delicate traditional matter. they re trying to put pressure, not only on the doj, but on the da. that s wrong. those of us on the oversight committee are having conversations internally, our chairman jamie raskin is pushing back really hard. we have to work with our other friends on the, particularly on the justice committee, judiciary, and other areas we can pushback on all these witch hunts. we are going to ensure that the
testimony on friday. it is the pace with which the judicial system moved to give him to testify. there was an appeal about whether or not he would be forced to testify in front of the grand jury that was taken off by the d.c. court of appeals. being engaged in extraordinarily rapid review of that case, asking the trump side to provide arguments at midnight. and the government to respond the following day, at six a.m., and then they ruled later that day that he would testify. so, when i see something moving that fast, which is extraordinarily fast, it tells me there is something exigent, that indicates to me, there may be something some concern, some evidence that this classified information out in the wild, in somewhere in donald trump s possession, that represents an ongoing national security threat. that is chilling. i thank you for articulating all of, peter strzok, good to see you. new information and tensions around the escalating conflict in syria, the warning president biden d
country has been headed in the absolutely wrong direction and it s under joe biden s presidency and the democratic leadership, the first time in 76 years we have two senators that are democrats from pennsylvania and we have a nation in crisis where our economy, a record high inflation debt, the offense and all crisis, the crime ravaging the city is, and what we need is leadership and a plan for moving forward, and that s what the book is about. a plan to educate our people and to confront china, and to secure america. in the thing that i learned on the campaign trail as people once leaders that are going to answer these problems, and that s what we need to do to turn the state around. laura: isn t the case that unless we have our own economic house in order, dave, we give people a fair shot at at least a middle-class lifestyle, that it is kind of kind of pie-in-the-sky thinking, do you think we will run the rest of the world when we can aim run ourselves? i completely agree with yo
pressure from the government and the right wing press even the uk which was an accusation by opposition politicians here, journalist, other sports stars. he said that isn t the case. there was an interesting question by our colleague because this tweet by gary lineker was critical of the current policy for immigrants coming into the uk. she asked him would you have suspended gary lineker if he said i 100% agree with this new policy by the uk government? you not be drawn on that. he also would not be drawn on the bbc chairman, richard sharpe. he is under scrutiny at the moment because of this loan that was given to the then prime minister boris johnson for around $1 million. he did not give the loan but he may been involved in the facilitation, introducing people to one another. so he is under scrutiny but he is not set back from his position although he says he has not done anything wrong. and he also said that he should resign. so those are the main points but i think it is