he thanked the president of the united states for focusing so much on this and yet there s this apprehension about what nato does. let s get to the secretary general. how does he convey to the president what he wants to convey, understand the role of nato and keep the president supporting the appliance? he s gone to great lengths and has been very productive in his ability to bring countri ba in the fold and spend more money. the sec reeitary general has gotten it up to seven nations. it it was really quite puthattic. but that s how he started this press avail. he said to the u.s. president look, it s part of your rhetoric that has brought these countries to the table and immediately president trump slapped that
decision, he was in fact insubordinate. it states we found it was extraordinary for comey to conceal his intentions from his superiors, the attorney general and deputy attorney general for the admitted purpose for telling him not to make the statement and to instruct his subordinates in the fbi to do the same. as you mentioned, director comey has responded in the last few minutes to that finding. the former and current fbi officials have said to fox news a finding of insubordination is really a big deal for a lack of better words, especially given fbi director comey and his stated commitment to leadership, shope. shepard: catherine, anything else? we ve learned now of course that he s being criticized for holding that sort of press avail before the election and then suggestions that that might have played a part in the outcome.
in oval. loved to have din we are him until he got fired. that s not there s not true by his own reckoning. let me ask you one other thing. dr. ron yes jackson is supposedly meeting with senior officials. he was going back to figure out the next steps. do you think ronnie jackson is going to hang in or are the new allegations about the perk set skrips and other behaviors is it too much for the white house? does he have to step aside. ronnie jackson was nominated by the president who just yesterday said he understands if dr. jackson stays in and he supports him and he certainly understands if he withdraws the nomination. it s his call it s the president s call. because of the process. but it s the president s call. i knows what s out the there. is that sufficient for him to want somebody else in there? christopher, a couple of things. these are allegations. in my view dr. jackson should have his say whether it s through a statement or through a press avail or through confi
too much for the white house? does he have to step aside. ronnie jackson was nominated by the president who just yesterday said he understands if dr. jackson stays in and he supports him and he certainly understands if he withdraws the nomination. it s his call it s the president s call. because of the process. but it s the president s call. i knows what s out the there. is that sufficient for him to want somebody else in there? christopher, a couple of things. these are ails. in my view dr. jackson should have his say whether it s through a statement or through a press avail or through confirmation hearings where he is swearing under oath what s true and fallout. in whole matter of crucifying somebody publicly with allegations anonymous allegations is dangerous. we take every allegation seriously but we d like the people to come forward or we would like dr. jackson to have his say. absolutely you have to have due process. and i would remind you and the viewers because th
and mark miller, an msnbc justice and security analyst, let s respond to this news. so, the president comes out, gives an impromptu press avail. he says, i would love to talk to the special counsel, would love nothing more, i mean, subject to my lawyer s approval. and predictably, we now have the new york times saying the lawyers are recommending to refuse this interview. what do you make of it? well, he certainly refuse the interview. the interview is voluntary. you can just insist on your subpoena. i think if he does refuse, he will get the subpoena, and then he ll be faced with the decision of whether he s going to take the fifth or not. in terms the of the subpoena, presumably that would be contested and would end up in the supreme court fairly quickly, correct? i don t know where it would end up? i mean, it s not that controversial. you get a subpoena, you have to go, unless you re going to assert your fifth amendment right. there don t seem to be too many complicated lega