you know they misled the public in the media about the hunter biden laptop in the 2020 campaign. you know chuck grassley had whistle-blowers call him about misdoings in the fbi that jim jordan got whistle-blower reports just last week about padding data on domestic terrorism. there is a lack of trust on the right, right now, with the fbi. and i think the way they went about this, the fact that they went about this, and especially if the fbi did this only looking for documents, it is really going to create even deeper divisions in the country. so which are you inclined to believe, the hit job, is that what you re saying? my point is this, i think if you re a conservative republican who follows politics, the fbi and the doj especially have lost the benefit of the doubt. because of the way they have behaved in the past, it is the burden is on them to actually show information as to why this is valid and why it is more than just about a confidential record search. i think you had a l
committee will eventually call the former president himself to speak. listen to what congressman mike quigley had to say in response to this earlier? this is a president, president trump, who has always evaded justice, who has never been held accountable for any of his misdoings and his crimes, frankly, so i would love to see it. do i imagine it happening, you know, if the past is any indication, i don t expect it. reporter: and trump was actually asked about this in a washington post interview this week, and he said that he hasn t been contacted by the committee but he didn t really give an answer on what he would do if he was, whether he would testify or not. but this is definitely something we are keeping a very close eye on here. as are we, and that brings me to my next guest, pennsylvania congresswoman madeline dean, the vice chair of the house judiciary committee, really quickly, allie raffa on capitol hill, thank you, congressman, i want to start with your thoughts
i wonder how you compare the approach to privacy and to public interest in the two countries. criminal cases are of course very different in germany. there is a law where whatever you re discussing a case, you have to use the initials of any member is involved, anybody who is being accused of a crime. in the case of something that is about a corporate sort of misdoings and so on, misdeeds, there s a little bit more freedom. this was not a criminal case we were looking at. and so, you know, in germany, the response has been very much one of wanting to get out of the feeling that there needs to be more of a look at how media companies are handling compliance cases and so on. but, yeah, it s different from a criminal case in that sense, that sense, germany is stricter than the uk. and, they become at only 30 seconds or so.
and that s very rarely reported if the decision is taken not to proceed. and the trouble is at that stage, the person or organisation has been damaged for all time. and, david and hugh, while you re focussed on the ruling of the supreme court in the uk, erika, you published a story with huge ramifications in germany, but it was published by the ft, which is based in the uk. i wonder how you compare the approach to privacy and to public interest in the two countries. criminal cases, of course, are very different in germany. there is a law is whatever you re discussing a case, you have to use the initials of any members involved anybody who is being accused of a crime. in the case of something that is about a corporate sort of misdoings and so on, misdeeds, there s a little bit more freedom. this was not a criminal case that we were looking at. and so, you know, in germany, the response has been very much one of wanting to get out
former rnc chair michael steele. professor, your view of the combined picture we re getting from each of these reports about the probe? well, it s definitely a case of keep your friends close and your enemies or at least those who can testify against you closer. and so it seems that former president trump is keeping tabs on mr. weisselberg because mr. weisselberg is one member of that small circle of trust. it s not just that the circle of trust is small that makes it difficult for the prosecutors, it s also that former president trump has over his course of business been really reticent to document his doings in email. he famously doesn t email. he doesn t write things down. so it s really mr. weisselberg who has been the eyes and ears of this whole operation that can provide the information to link any misdoings to trump. that s really what s needed here. if weisselberg isn t talking, it s going to be very difficult to get the goods to prove intent