shooting out a bad idea? take another look. this tariff critique is from, you see it. january 26, 2017. that was trump s first week in office. graham apparently testing out what it might be like to stand up to a new president and doing so while his long time mennor john mccain was testing trump on certain topics. now he supports just about everything including what he opposed in 2017. george will just told us a theory for why this is happening on the show this week. remember, he was, lindsey graham, it was lindsey graham people thought was funny and interesting as long as john mccain was around to keep him on the right leash. mccain is gone and the leash is gone and this is the real lindsey graham. that s despite the attacks on the senator. graham waived these attacks off
testimony 23450umarch 20, 2017? what was your opinion about mr. comey? what did you think about mr. comey s intelligence briefing on january 26, 2017 about mr. comey s appearance? i believe that s also where the president learned about the tinkle tape and whatnot. what was the purpose of your january 27, 2017 din we are comey and what was said? what did you think and do with reaction to the news that the special counsel was speaking to mr. rogers, mr. pompeo and mr. koets? and finally what did you mean when you told russian diplomats on may 10, 2017, that firing comey had taken the pressure off. could all of those questions have been inspired by this counterintelligence investigation that we didn t know about until your report friday? i think more to the point was that there were specific russia questions about things before trump took office that were in there. and we never sort of understood why. we thought that the president was simply looking at an obstruction criminal investigat
so page 230 of the book we learn that the national security council and the national security adviser to the president concluded last summer that the president had somehow, quote, picked up russian government propaganda and started tweeting to it the american people. the national security adviser knew about it. he told for some reason the white house economic adviser and the white house staff secretary, and he told them that it was confirmed both by him and his shop and by intelligence experts that the president had obtained and was distributing russian government propaganda. oh! that seems like a story. i would like to know more. were there consequences of that? how did the national security council handle that? how did the president get the propaganda? was he i have here s another one. this is from chapter 10. quote, on january 26, 2017, so right after the inauguration, deputy attorney general sally
started tweeting to it the american people. the national security adviser knew about it. he told for some reason the white house economic adviser and the white house staff secretary, and he told them that it was confirmed both by him and his shop and by intelligence experts that the president had obtained and was distributing russian government propaganda. oh! that seems like a story. i would like to know more. were there consequences of that? how did the national security council handle that? how did the president get the propaganda? was he i have here s another one. this is from chapter 10. quote, on january 26, 2017, so right after the inauguration, deputy attorney general sally yates had come to white house. she told white house counsel don mcgahn that intercepts showed that mike flynn, had not been truthful about contacts with
involvement in the election and cyber attacks and interference campaign by vladimir putin. you are quoted in that story. what do you want to say about that? what can you tell us? the fact that we briefed him, then president-elect trump on january 26, 2017 about russian interference and was directed from the top is not a startling revelati revelation. this is the first key judgment that we issued that very same day. i want to make clear and i appreciate the opportunity to bring this up, that some of the things in that new york times article are not accurate and i don t want to be associated with confirming or denying anything that is in it. i will just say for right now that it s not completely accurate. you are not going to go into detail? there was one juicy tidbit about a source close to putin being