when is a secondary question. the fact that there wasn t a public pronouncement to me is wholly acceptable. there s a variety of reasons why the health and ongoings of our top nation s officials may not need to be broadcast out for foreign governments to hear and learn about, but certainly within the department and certainly within the white house, they should have been briefed immediately. i think it s important that secretary austin has owned this mistake, has made clear that it was an inexcusable choice for his actions, and ultimately, i do hope that there is a review to ensure that there wasn t any jeopardizing of national security protocols or processes because of his condition. bottom line, though, was america less safe during this period? i think that at this moment in that time, that s not something that anybody can answer with certainty. i say that as a former cia
for example, is a classified document. a public one that probably goes to about 50 people in the white house would be at minimum secret. and then there s much more, you know, private schedules, line by line schedules that would be even more classified than that. but the notion of uploading any of this information online is clearly a security breach and goes against the most basic both archiving and national security protocols. i m very confused about what he s wanting to do with them. but it does seem like this junior aide was doing this at the direction of the former president. it almost brings to mind like the kim jong un letters and other memorabilia of sorts from his presidency that he wanted to keep and sort of store in some sort of way. again, completely flouting, archiving, and national security laws. but i think we need to know a bit more before i can pass much judgment. does this reporting reveal anything to you about specific charges that the doj might be focusing on or wha
confusing people. and if the democrats are disciplined in an impeachment case and put him in the chair where they can counter him with documents and witnesses, that s a whole different place. rudy giuliani in his past life was also a skilled prosecutor and he may surprise democrats and may kind of come out swinging as well. and so i think the democrats should probably be cautious in their efforts to kind of corner him, of course like you say if it s just a matter of facts then they ll probably be okay. one issue, though, i want to touch on something molly said, rudy giuliani, the president and even people in the administration whenever giuliani, his conduct strays from the ethical norms of the administration, they say well, he s representing the president in his personal capacity, but at the end of the day, he s been acting in ways that are really concerning a lot of people within the administration, stretching national security protocols. and the use of taxpayer funded prag funded
you can t do that if you are designing a contract to just go to one bidder. do we trust amazon keep the pentagon s data. not an american company. multinational china. we re comfortable with that. it s not a matter of the company because we have got obviously national security protocols that we put in place. but, tucker, you know better than most people that if you are trusting n washington, d.c. to get it right, oftentimes they don t. you mentioned at the top of this hour you know what you have is basically department of defense defense does a great job defending our national interests. it is so bloated across the potomac here we have hundreds of thousands of people that candidly are not necessarily investing in the american taxpayer s dollar in the most wise and efficient way.