bureaucracy. the point here is it s not ideological. if you oppose trump, you might be happy that he is not making these decisions or picking more people in his image. if you support trump, you might be upset that he is so uninvolved that he is not putting his stamp on so many powerful posts. this is deeper than that. this is about the risk posed by a president who is essentially mia overseeing a partially mia cabinet, managing what are now hundreds of mia posts in our federal government which is of course currently completely shut down. this is important amidst all the other stories. this is the risk of mixing inexperience, apathy and arrogance in the white house. the inexperience was obviously known. trump never did public service before he ran for president. the apathy was part of trump s con. he claimed he quit golf and worked hard, and maybe some believed him. he hasn t done either. and the privileged arrogance is wearing thin. trump likes to act like it will
people who report on the law investigations know which is this is different than other areas because so much secrecy is required. it can be difficult to even get a background or off the record rebuttal of no, that s wrong. take a look at an earlier mueller talking about that. with freedom of the press comes an inherent tension between government and the media. those of us in government appreciate that tension as one of the positive aspects of an open and a free society. though i sometimes have to remind myself of that when i do pick up the newspaper in the morning and read some of the stories that have been written about the bureau. well, you know, there is a tension between government and the press, and that is a good thing. that doesn t mean that when there is a story that s disputed that it is fake news, as the president is trying to say. sure. and that s there may well be things in the story that
conspiracy, for how the tabloid could help suppress and cover up salacious stories about donald trump and women. joining us now from the washington post, the white house bureau chief phil rucker, joan winebanks, msnbc legal analyst and sporter of brilliant pins and with me at this table, katy tur plus, not quite one but close to another one who, of course, covered the trump campaign and reverend al sharpton, the host of politics nation and president of the national action network and emily jane fox, senior reporter with vanity fair and the person to whom michael cohen once said he d take a bullet for donald trump. phil rucker, you say along with your colleague that trump s falsehoods on the hush money payments are coming home to roost. and that people around the president are basically freaking out over what might come next. please tell us more. yeah, john, so there s a lot of concern within the
to normal people, sounded like a conspiracy, for how the tabloid could help suppress and cover up salacious stories about donald trump and women. joining us now from the washington post, the white house bureau chief phil rucker, joan winebanks, msnbc legal analyst and sporter of brilliant pins and with me at this table, katy tur plus, not quite one but close to another one who, of course, covered the trump campaign and reverend al sharpton, the host of politics nation and president of the national action network and emily jane fox, senior reporter with vanity fair and the person to whom michael cohen once said he d take a bullet for donald trump. phil rucker, you say along with your colleague that trump s falsehoods on the hush money payments are coming home to roost. and that people around the president are basically freaking out over what might come next. please tell us more. yeah, john, so there s a lot
some people who would be watching this with a skeptical eye would say why would a tabloid sit on salacious stories when it is in the business of selling salacious stories, why would they have these files on somebody like president trump, as owe outlined, and then sit o them and do nothing with them? it s about collecting favors, more than anything. when you re a media owner and you have a vast variety of publications, ami does, information comes your way. as you collect famous people, you want to keep them in your favor. what better way to do that than killing stories that might embarrass them. how do you benefit from that in the long run, you keep something you can use when you need their help, whether it s in breaking an advertiser that they have a connection with, or more importantly helping another publication that you own that is struggling at the newsstand, and killing a story in the enquirer, and convincing them to go to one of the other publications you have. so to that e