were intelligence officers upset by this coming so forcefully into mainstream discussion, into political debate in capitol hill. the timing suggests maybe the timing suggests that this was this was not new information. the united states has known about this interference, this disinformation campaign for quite some time. so why is information being pushed now? one theory is because it has come so forcefully on display in the impeachment proceedings. however however we don t know my reporting does not say definitively that the intelligence officers who gave the original material to the senate made that link. julian barnes, national security reporter for the new york times, congratulations on this story. i feel like this has been the
as people who could potentially promulgate this disinformation themselves? do we know why the ic decided to brief this to the senate? that s an excellent question. because what we can t say is were intelligence officers upset by this coming so forcefully into mainstream discussion, into political debate in capitol hill. the timing suggests maybe the timing suggests that this was this was not new information. the united states has known about this interference, this disinformation campaign for quite some time. so why is information being pushed now? one theory is because it has come so forcefully on display in the impeachment proceedings. however however we don t know my reporting does not say definitively that the intelligence officers who gave
have not only come to this conclusion that claim about ukrainian election interference has been promulgated by russian intelligence for purposes of benefitting the russian government they ve not only concluded that, but they ve briefed it to u.s. senators. from your reporting do we understand anything about why intelligence agencies have briefed this to senators, which senators got this briefing, whether this was meant to be sort of a protective briefing in terms of senators being targeted as people who could essentially pra promulgate this themselves? do we know why the ic decided to brief this to the senate? that s an excellent question. because what we can t say is were intelligence officers upset by this coming so forcefully into mainstream discussion, into political debate in capitol hill. the timing suggests maybe the
you ll hear in 2020. the idea the democratic party is moving quickly to the left is moving out of the mainstream is one position you took in the last couple of days is getting some conversation some other candidates have taken the position that i m interested in. it is on this question of reparations and payments to black americans with family legacy that could be traced back to slavery. you said the country would be better off if it found a way to do that. and that is one of the it is not an issue that has gotten a lot of mainstream discussion. most recent poll i could find was about two or three years old that showed two-thirds of americans oppose that idea. put it up on the screen. 68% were against reparations payments. could you talk more about what you would do as president when it came to that and if you are worried that that sends a message to that 68% of americans who say they re against it, that maybe you are out of the mainstream a little? well, you know, this is not so
people that use their products data seriously. and it is our responsibility as an organization and every other technology company that collects user data to be clear about how they re data is being used. it isn t going to end today. it shouldn t end today. in fact, what we re really encouraged by is the fact that privacy and user data is becoming a mainstream discussion. that is an incredible step forward in making sure the in r inter the internet is a safe place. and with the back drop of the golden gate bridge. thank you very much. thank you for having me. the white house pushing back on reports that v.a. secretary david shulkin could be next. the bottom line is we always seven at the pleasure of the president and if he s not pleased you ll know it. at this point in time he does have confidence in dr. shulkin and he is the secretary and done some great things at the v.a. but as you know the president wants to put right people in the right place at the right time