warrant. that means the fbi, twice, had to assemble an enormous amount of information, saying to a judge, look, there is probable cause to believe that paul manafort is an agent of foreign intelligence. they persuaded a judge twice. so there does exist considerable evidence. it doesn t mean he s guilty of anything. it is important. to emphasize two things you said there that i think are worthy of stating again. number one, there are tapes now in someone s possession of these conversations that paul manafort had. that is not something we knew beforehand. surveillance means, by definition, there are tapes. they weren t just listening. there are recordings. when you get a fisa warrant you get permission to make tapes of phone calls. that s the big deal. they are presumably in the hands of the mueller investigation. you bring up the point that this happened twice. the second time, it indicates that probably there was something found that first time
no one knows exactly what they want, but you work together and get something that all sides are not totally happy with and everybody got a little piece of something. could we be going back towards something like that? my opponent draws comparisons to greek history, i take a piece of wisdom from foreign advice where i grew up. you don t talk to an angry mule because is not going to go the direction you want in the minute you get behind it, it s going to kick you. donald trump has learned that mcconnell and paul ryan and congressional republicans are the angry mule. they re not getting anything done, they re not going any direction right or wrong even with the majority, so he s looking beyond that for how to change the game. melissa: brian, it doesn t mean he s siding with democrats altogether entering republicans out the window. maybe he is just showing them that i need to go in a different direction to get this started and know you come to the table and tell me what you want. it do
these russia issues, maybe he could get away with it. i don t know. i think he s looking into these options but i don t think that it s necessarily sinister that he s doing so. doesn t it show weakness, though? we re supposed to be marking the six-month an verse aanniversary trump administration. we all think back to january 20th, inauguration day. it s july 20th talking about whether the president can pardon himself. the washington post saying he s asking those questions. doesn t it show weakness rather than strength for this administration? i think it s his administration is under investigation. how told the new york times, he s not, his family is not. i don t know what he s talking about. the times and the post have both reported and my information is that they are investigating the president. that doesn t mean he s going to be charged with anything. it doesn t mean he s guilty of anything. but, you know, what else are they investigating? they re investigating the
i think he s looking into these options but i don t think that it s necessarily sinister that he s doing so. doesn t it show weakness, though? we re supposed to be marking the six-month anniversary of the trump administration. we all think back to january 20th, inauguration day. it s july 20th talking about whether the president can pardon himself. the washington post saying he s asking those questions. even if he s innocently asking those questions, doesn t it show weakness for this administration rather than strength for this administration? i think it s his administration is under investigation. how told the new york times, he s not, his family is not. i don t know what he s talking about. the times and the post have both reported and my information is that they are investigating the president. that doesn t mean he s going to be charged with anything. it doesn t mean he s guilty of anything. but, you know, what else are they investigating? they re investigating the
nsa rogers, the head of the dni coats. those are witnesses to possible obstruction of justice of donald trump. that s the only reason to interview them. it doesn t mean donald trump is guilty. it doesn t mean he s going to be charged with anything. but is he under investigation? of course he is. david, do you buy sekulow s explanation that the president s tweet was in response to a washington post article that cited unnamed sources that the president was under investigation, kellyanne conway said that it was i think i think she said he was employing irony if memory serves me correct. oh, yes. it s too clever by half. when anybody says donald trump didn t really explain the whole story because he only had 140 characters to play with and so therefore he just donald trump, if he had a real story to tell, would have done five tweets in a row. but i think what was going on here, anderson, is that something very similar in a very positive way, by the way, years ago when president e