assessment released in 2017? if, however, director brennan s statement is purely political and based on conjecture the president has full authority to revoke his security clearance as the head of the executive branch. i have wondered that myself. if brennan is making some of these statements based on something he knew when he was in government, and actively getting briefed, then why didn t he raise it at the time? if you are a democrat, and find yourself defending omarosa, if you are a democrat and found yourself giving money to peter strzok s go fund me page, if you are a democrat and find yourself championing brennan to the ends of the earth all just because they are people who can hurt donald trump, you are drunk on partisanship. you have gone too far. you need to set it down for a while, have a cup of coffee and clear your head. this is how partisanship distorts people s thinking. john brennan doesn t have to be a hero in order to oppose donald trump. can you hear and see him bas
would you characterize these town halls in terms of how they ve gone so far? in terms of tone? positively. let me ask you this. you re part of a nonprofit called students speak up, right? that is correct. give me a sense it s a non-partisan effort here but then there s also the washington post that put out at least some understanding of those who were at the march for our lives and almost 80% said that they were left leaning. but you re saying your effort is non-partisan. yeah, i think that when we speak about the issue of non-partisanship we have to realize that yes the majority of people who want gun reform are left-leaning, whoouhowever what want is our politicians, whether state or local, to come reach
surveillance. and we really should, as we re waiting and forgive me for looking at my phone, reporting and talking to you on tv realtime here. but shimon, it s very, very important to underscore as we get this memo and as we go through it, the real deal here, which is it is a highly political memo, it is just done by the republicans on the intelligence committee, which breaks with precedent for this committee, which is generally an oasis of non-partisanship, never mind bipartisanship. and that is why your sources at the fbi and doj are upset, right? because they think this is cherry picked. and certainly they ve been bracing for this all morning with news that this is now coming, and we ll see how they react once it comes out. this has been their central issue with this, in that it is extremely one-sided. it does not paint the full picture of what the fbi was
decisions? when you put a country like chad on the muslim ban, do we know what that means? do we understand that we have troops there. all of those questions are not fully integrated into trump s decision-making process. we can thank steve bannon for that. even though one could argue that there s not some disruptive change by trump, that s arguable. the processes have been so imploded already. that the next president is going to have to rebuild processes, right, and non-partisanship in our national strategy if there isn t some major catastrophe between now and then. everybody gets their turn. we re not beating up on you. i agree. she makes some good points. the way the president has operated has been a bit unusual to say the least. let me just interrupt. he s been at war with some of the more established figures in his own administration,
this study. they didn t, the judges in this case didn t really assign blame in a way, and they, but they did say that the system worked against democrats in the state. i should point out, it was democrats in this case that were the losers, but there are challenges around the country that aim at this problem many one from maryland says that the democratic leadership in maryland did this with congressional districts in a way to hurt republican chances. and is there, can you foresee a team when you have one of these rulings be broad enough the way that the gay marriage rulings changed marriage laws nationwide where we could s see non-partisanship, non-gerrymandering districts. they would have to abide by different standards than they do now. there is a movement out there to