that has arisen about the trump campaign is the prospect that the trump campaign provided russian sources with internal detailed technical polling information that could conceivably been helpful to russian intelligence while they were mounting that foreign intelligence campaign to try to tamper with the election to benefit trump. well, manafort in his d.c. case was found to have lied to prosecutors about his contacts with the russian intelligence guy, and he was found to have lied to prosecutors about his dealings during the campaign with the guy who handled the trump polling. well, lying to keep those things covered up and then lying to a sea of reporters and tv cameras to say, hey, these judges found there was definitely no collusion, well, if there was collusion and there are worries that this president might use the powers of his office to cover it up, to quash any investigation that might turn up evidence of russian collusion, if there are worries that this president might use his
performance, and honestly, in the broader context here, whatever paul manafort may know about that subject or not, he didn t cooperate with prosecutors to give them truthful and useful information about it. remember, prosecutors in both courthouses told the judges that manafort should get no credit whatsoever for his supposed cooperation because he wasn t in fact cooperating with them. and in this d.c. court today, the judge affirmed her earlier ruling that manafort in fact deliberately lied to prosecutors about his connections during the campaign with a russian guy who is tied to russian intelligence. she also ruled in the manafort case that manafort deliberately lied about his dealings with the guy who produced detailed polling information for the trump campaign. one of the collusion allegations that has ariz risen about the trump campaign is the prospect that the trump campaign provided russian sources with internal detailed technical polling information that would have conceivably
you want to take corsi word. all these things should be tested. that s what we re doing right now. i certainly not the only forum, matt. if what the democrats got is manafort shared polling information with people that were loosely affiliated with russians, i think that clearly that is not going to result in impeachment. what would satisfy you? unless you had a picture of donald junior with putin on your lap. he wouldn t go under oath. that s not true. doctored up by his lawyers to make sure he wasn t exposed to anything. that would be a bar violation you re alleging. come on, matt, if you have well, there are sworn responses under oath, chris. i know. carefully lawyered. what would raise to the level of impeachment? carefully lawyered. carefully lawyered. so what, a president has the highest duty in this nation to be honest.
president knew about manafort. everybody knew what he was about overs overseas and made money in ways you might not want to know. the surprise factor very low for the president, in my estimation. secondly, paul manafort colluded with people connected to russian interference. this is a polling argument? it s not a polling argument. the polling, you made that argument you took internal data, you gave it to somebody that the government believes is connected to russian intelligence and then the russian trolls started targeti targets the same places and faces the campaign did. you re really making the argument the polling information paul manafort may or may not have not may or may not. he did. no, here s the problem the polling was right. every poll in america on the 2016 presidential election it s not about its accuracy. it s about its he was sharing, like, some shoddy polling information? this is what collusion is. collusion is a behavior. you re saying if i
the surprise factor very low for the president, in my estimation. secondly, paul manafort colluded with people connected to russian interference. this is a polling argument? it s not a polling argument. the polling, you made that argument you took internal data, you gave it to somebody that the government believes is connected to russian intelligence and then the russian trolls started targeting the same places and faces the campaign did. you re really making the argument the polling information paul manafort may or may not have shared with russians not may or may not. he did. no, here s the problem the polling was right. every poll in america on the 2016 presidential election it s not about its accuracy. it s about its he was sharing, like, some shoddy polling information? this is what collusion is. collusion is a behavior. you re saying if it s not a crime, it doesn t count. and he wasn t charged with a crime that has to do with this