[laughing]. all of the questions that it raises are first of all, user consent is required? the person can decline or accept? do we want there to be a warrant. that requires what you are seizing. there is no such thing here. does that matter? there is a fine line between private surveillance and government surveillance. does it matter here that the company is the intermediary between the police and the users? it s like all of the dna databases. does someone else s consent to you and that technology has outgrown the legal field. we are trying to put it into that structure. it s based on our gut feeling. the law hasn t caught up. so, jason, as a conservative. the founding fathers were very
line joe biden has drawn which is reasonable for most americans, he doesn t want to pay for it. he took seriously a statement. he says if i personally oppose abortion then i should pay for it and i think most americans and democrats will see that as a reasonable period martha: it raises aside from the moral issues it raises that interesting political question. look at the polling in america it appears that the majority of americans are not where so many of these candidates are on this issue. does it strengthen joe biden s hand to say no, actually i am on the side of 51% of americans. i think when planned parenthood was available in every state and had access to abortions for women who wanted it and it s the constitutional right under the constitution and this court hasn t changed that. i think most americans realize that that right should be given on your ability to pay.
the oval office where the president says to them, now a lot of pressure is off me now that i got rid of comey with this whole russia deal. well, look, if it wasn t on his mind, if it wasn t a motivation for him legal or illegal, right or wrong, it was clearly in his mind about why he wanted to get rid of comey. again, you re acting as if that s not a constitutional right if that was, in fact, what was in his mind. again, that s speculation. but i think that that s what we have to be clear here. i have to look at what the law is as the evidence exists and what the law is. and when you get to the article 2 issue, it s a very serious moment. right. constitutionally for our country if a president s decision making on what s called inferior office that s not in a pejorative way. it s what the constitution and rules and regulations actually say. it does. to say you can then cross-examine, so to speak, the president any president on that decision, very dangerous and exactly
have to be clear here. i have to look at what the law is as the evidence exists and what the law is. and when you get to the article 2 issue, it s a very serious moment. right. constitutionally for our country if a president s decision making on what s called inferior office that s not in a pejorative way. it s what the constitution and rules and regulations actually say. it does. to say you can then cross-examine, so to speak, the president any president on that decision, very dangerous and exactly the reason we have separation of power. you suggest you should never do it, would you? never do what? would you suggest that you should never question a president s actions with respect to an inferior officer ever? i think it raises i think the constitutional hurdle that you have to cross over to get into that which doesn t exist here, you try to put that into a perspective. what would be the standard when you believe there is corrupt intent, illegal intent.
it s funny, in a weird way it rhymes with the discussion we were having earlier about paul ryan with mark and it raises, positing an alternative history and questions about what that would imply and carrying it forward to today. it raises the question we keep coming back to again and again. what are these people thinking? i ask you about it always because you spent many, many years in this party and for a long time were a card carrying member of it, now not so much. but, again, what are they thinking? i can t imagine because, again, you had the united states military people working at fort mea meade. you had dan coats, kirstjen nielsen, trump s own appointed fbi director, you had everybody that donald trump has appointed