amounts of speaker fees, and they are trying to get into the real world, and it is hijacked by someone who wants to talk about herself and issues that are unrelated to school. greg: it is not hijacking, it is exactly what they want. katie: a parent who has paid hundreds of thousands of dollars, and you have to listen to that. greg: this has been going on for decades, they have liberal commencement speakers. they have a liberal administration. it is one big liberal love fest. when i see this, it is like being surprised when you find garbage at the dump. dana: a lot of commencement speakers, not as much of this year, but in 2016 coming saw a lot of commencement speakers use it as a chance to make news. it was like oh, okay. what can you do to get on cable news? jesse: it is why she is staying in the game, she thought the insurance policy would kick in, he would get impeached, and
wrong doings with russia. do you see the hypocrisy there? trump looked and investigated a business opportunity as a private citizen. hillary and bill clinton as ex-secretary of state and president accepted $500,000 for one speech. speech money? and $1800 million speaker fees and $100 million in uranium one related donations to the clinton foundation. that is actual fact. that is money pouring into clinton cough firs versus donald trump looking at a business opportunity these are apples and oranges. and actually. certain fruits are fruit. i would encourage everyone and you to just go on google and do a fact checking about this wholure rabiam one thing and all of this. i agree. and you. read clinton. and you. clinton cash is not a book of fact. just do a fact check on everything steve just said. steve, you never answered my
this is not about getting paid. this is about the president using the white house to try to stop criticism of him? well, exactly. and that is the second point. that is why donald trump is actually revehicleing security clean, which is hugely inappropriate and problematic. he s doing this as a political tacking the to go over his political opponents. that should not be at all when discussing the security clearance i think criticism of the president is extremely important. i don t want that to become a reason we can t discuss security clearance overall. i do fear that is happening a bit here. when somebody does decide they no longer want to sit as a civil servant in the uk there are strict rules of what you can say about the civil servant. that s true in the u.s., you are not supposed to be political either. if they want to take speaker
officials served under republican and democrat administrations. is the president stepping into a minefield here? thanks for having me, natalie. i think it s really important to separate two issues here. the first is whether or not we can talk about a very important topic, which is whether or not in certain circumstances security clearance should be revoked and is appropriate to be revoked. i see circumstances in which it is. few look at the 13 guidelines of which you can revoke somebody s security clearance. they include things like outside issues, outside activities, specifically, also financial contributions that they might be getting from elsewhere. if someone has decided to go on the public speaking cirque or go on, get paid by national television to get paid for their views. i think they should question their security clearance we have to separate that from what donald trump is actually doing. what about dozens an dozens of former officials saying this is not about speaker fee
russia firm tied to uranium one that gave him 5 million dollars. that went to their personal coffers, 48 million in speaker fees and other arrangements that clinton had while she was secretary of state. what were they seeking clintons that they would give this money. you have classified information on the internet equivalent of a public park bench and james comey and the proclinton crowd didn t think that was a big deal. we need to redo that. the justice department asking questions is the least that can be done, given the outrageous sham investigation that took place last year. tom, i want to get back to that classified information in a moment. can we lean in on the money because what i m reading and trying to understand is how this didn t get talked about much