So we havent had a chance to digest it. But the Attorney General in his Confirmation Hearings was very clear with a oneword answer when asked by a senator whether he had contact with the russians in any way, shape, or form. He said no, period. No condition, no modification. So obviously that turns out to not be accurate there is no reason to believe that Jeff Sessions in the Confirmation Hearing was trying to hide something. He may simply have forgotten. But it does mean two things. Number one, it adds to the incredible weight of evidence that the administration is not credible on these issues. Remember a couple of weeks ago when we heard that Michael Flynn was talking to the Russian Ambassador simply to wish him merry christmas. And of course that turns out not to be true. And Michael Flynn is no longer National Security adviser. So this white house has a very, very significant credibility problem. And its with respect to Attorney General sessions, what this means, and again, its too
now attorney general jeff sessions, met with the russian envoy twice last year and counters he did not disclose, as the washington post. and chris you have some reaction to this. right. because for months now you and i have covered the interesting battle between elijah cummings, ranking member of the government reform committee in the house and darrell issa who was chair all those months. they were duelling it idealogically and a partisan way back and forth. now they re both on the same front. darrell issa wants an investigation of the whole russian investigation. and tonight elijah cummings is calling for the resignation of the attorney general. there is an interesting sort of watergate whiff to this that republicans are beginning to join with the democrats and calling for investigation, which is very interesting because if you re in a swing district, which has become a swing district for darrell issa, you want to be someone looking for truth. and i think that s always a safe posi
new days of the trump administration. the other about contacts by the now attorney general jeff sessions, met with the russian envoy twice last year and counters he did not disclose, as the washington post. and chris you have some reaction to this. right. because for months now you and i have covered the interesting battle between elijah cummings, ranking member of the government reform committee in the house and darrell issa who was chair all those months. they were duelling it idealogically and a partisan way back and forth. now they re both on the same front. darrell issa wants an investigation of the whole russian investigation. and tonight elijah cummings is calling for the resignation of the attorney general. there is an interesting sort of watergate whiff to this that republicans are beginning to join with the democrats and calling for investigation, which is very interesting because if you re in a swing district, which has become a swing district for darrell issa, you want
known about in the late days of the obama administration, scattered about as not to be discovered or destroyed in the new days of the trump administration. the other about contacts by the now attorney general jeff sessions, met with the russian envoy twice last year and counters he did not disclose, as the washington post. and chris you have some reaction to this. right. because for months now you and i have covered the interesting battle between elijah cummings, ranking member of the government reform committee in the house and darrell issa who was chair all those months. they were duelling it idealogically and a partisan way back and forth. now they re both on the same front. darrell issa wants an investigation of the whole russian investigation. and tonight elijah cummings is calling for the resignation of the attorney general. there is an interesting sort of watergate whiff to this that republicans are beginning to join with the democrats and calling for investigation, which is
waste. obama care for all of it what it wanted to do, didn t touch the fact that basically they pay to nonexistent entities in the tens of billions of dollars every year. that s got to be changed. i notice you just used the word obamacare, that s not exactly a non-partisan looks at the health care reform. that s what partisans call it when they want to attack it. obamacare. people call it reform when they want to you think it s reform. the health care bill clearly when it became law was about expanding medicaid mandates that have been tentatively ruled unconstitutional and a big growth in government, and the reform was extremely light or non-existent. so, as republicans, our goal is to repeal what was done on a partisan basis, come back and do on a bipartisan basis real reform. and my committee, which has the dominant amount of oversight