let s see. yesterday was an encouraging moment in a bipartisan way, you re not going to come here and assert bogus privileges. now, that will be tested with some of the witnesses we have coming up, and we don t acknowledge witnesses, but i ll just say that will be tested with some of the witnesses we re going to hear from today and throughout the week. let s see if republicans stick to the bipartisan precedent that was set yesterday. all right. well, thank you so much for spending some time with us. we know how busy you are. of course, my pleasure. we appreciate it. ben, let me bring you back to this and ask you about these two, i think it s safe to call them flash points that we started the program talking about and just ask you again if the house intel committee wants to know everything steve bannon knows about the decision to fire jim comey, your friend, does that suggest that maybe a potential obstruction of justice inquiry goes back further than that, that perhaps they re
steve bannon blames for making that decision is jared kushner. that s absolutely right, nicole. and, so, that is presumed to be one of his values as a witness, is and he may only be a hearsay value. he may have only heard about things kushner was doing. one of the lines mueller is pursuing is what meetings kushner was having during the transition and bannon may have information about that. and i think paul really nailed it. you know, i ve always presumed that bannon s chief value as a witness is his answer to the sort of penultimate question of what did the president know and when did he know it. what did he know about did he dispatch mike flynn to go negotiate with the russian ambassador over sanctions? you know, the answers to those key questions, that s going to be his value and, you know, presumably he s got a lot to say on that subject, nicole. natasha, we talk more about the obstruction of justice line of the investigation because it s got more public facing t t tentacles