i think that was good. even a broke clock is right twice a day. but i hope that everyone would support this because i think it is an injustice. but i might add while weir are talking about policing in stockholm, let s talk about policing, mr. president, in the united states where you re the head of state, where we saw this week in philadelphia police suspended to be fired for race tinged facebook pages, where policeman were fired in chicago because of their misleading investigators and silence in key parts of the mcdonald case and in new york where your justice department would not prosecute a police officer who on tape choked a man to death who said 11 times i can t breathe. it s time to not be so
when he talked about the justification for firing comey. daniel, i want your read on this sound bite from the 60 minutes discussion of mccabe talking about rosenstein and his interactions with president trump. concerned by his interactions with the president who seemed to be very focussed on entiring the director and saying things like make sure you put russia in your memo. that concerned rod in the same way that it concerned me and the fbi investigators on the russia case. he didn t want to put russia in the memo? he did not. he explained he did not need russia in his memo. the president responded, i understand that. i am asking you to put russia in the memo anyway. russia did not end up in that memo, daniel, of course, but what does it say to you that the president made the request? you have to understand mccabe and rosenstein were in an impossible situation.
on wednesday we ll join morning joe. you re not going to want to miss either of the discussions. still ahead, a series of stunning developments in a high profile alleged attack with sources saying an actor from empire is no longer seen as a victim in the case. so what is he? and right after this break, why words matter. the president partly running around congress to get the wall money he wants. what legal experts say about why his own words may be held against him. danny is looking into that and into the courts where lawsuits are apparently imminent. e appar. it offers a lot of great technology inside. oh, this is fancy. yeah, that s the available hd surround vision camera. the top of your car? it helps you see dangers around the vehicle. what is that? what the? wait wait wait. what is that? oh my god. what is happening? these are big alligators. now we re surrounded. so who s getting out first? i don t know but we re keeping this camera on. [laughing]
steven miller on the musunday shows. it got pretty feisty. can you name one case where a president has asked congress for money, congress refused and the president has then invehicloked national powers? the current situation yes or no. the current situation pertains to the military construction authority. i m asking . congress said no and he then many t meaning of the statute is clear on its own terms. if you don t like the statute, or members of congress don t the answer is no? there hasn t been a single case like this? how important is precedent here, danny? precedent is critical. the key case is the case called youngstown where president truman tried to nationalize the steel industry during the korean war declaring a state of national emergency. the supreme court ultimately struck down trumanen s attempt to take over the industry, saying that when the president
i think someone who were to attempt to challenge mr. trump would have to be someone with high name i.d. it would have to be someone who could raise a lot of money. the expectation would not be to defeat mr. trump but to cause enough chaos within the party to pull enough votes from mr. trump causing him to essentially lose against someone who some people see as a moderate. president obama has given good advice to try to form a message that resonates within republican-leaning districts. i think that there is a case to be made for some democrats, perhaps maybe a harris or klobuchar, who could talk to some republicans who are upper middle class and college educated and voted for trump because he s a republican but are not happy. saying i am willing to vote for a democrat who i may not agree with 100%, but is moderate enough to gain my support.