information, those aren t anywhere near complete. its investigation into trump s panel of classified information, that s not something that is whether they have the evidence necessary to go forward with criminal charges. it have to battle tests that amongst themselves, and lots to lots of meetings and lots and lots of debates before they bring that to the deputy interning general, and the attorney general to get them to weigh in. so before we go, when cassidy hutchinson, former chief of staff to mark meadows testify before the january six committee, she detailed the conflict awhile between donald trump and a member of the secret service tony ornato. after she testified, we heard from trump camp that ornato would be coming out publicly to dispute everything that she said, it was wholly untrue. yet we have not heard one single word publicly from him. and today, after 25 years of
amongst themselves, and lots to lots of meetings and lots and lots of debates before they bring that to the deputy interning general, and the attorney general to get them to weigh in. so before we go, when cassidy hutchinson, former chief of staff to mark meadows testify before the january six committee, she detailed the conflict awhile between donald trump and a member of the secret service tony ornato. after she testified, we heard from trump camp that ornato would be coming out publicly to dispute everything that she said, it was wholly untrue. yet we have not heard one single word publicly from him. and today, after 25 years of the secret service, he retired. are we ever gonna hear from this guy, because the news never came, out but we never got to meet. that s really perceptive stephanie, we haven t heard him
public statements one way or the other about whether or not sure. until i finish the process, because you do want to american public to understand this. with so much misinformation, disinformation coming from the trump camp, coming from steve bannon, rudy giuliani, you want to make sure that the public knows you re playing above board. fair. emily? ari, you used the word pru deshl a few minutes ago. sorry. no, no, i think it s helpful. it s the idea that, okay, you have discretion. is this wise? should congress, a co-equal branch of government refer the former president for a criminal matter to a new justice department for interfering with an election? that s really tough. we haven t seen that happen before in american history. i m not sure what i think the answer is, but i can really understand this is a very hard decision to make. this is separate from, should attorney general merrick garland
some outlets portraying john durham motions as proof that the hillary clinton campaign paid to spri on the trump camp. he rejects that he fought to politicize the case. he writes, if third parties or members of the media have overstated, understated or otherwise misinterpreted facts contained in the government s motion. that does not in any way undermine the valid reasons for the government s inclusion of this movement. hayes brown joins us. as i welcome you, my friend, how significant is it you have durham himself now distancing from the way the conservatives are portraying his filing? i think it s pretty important. this whole thing goes to a case against an an indictment named michael flesman with the hillary campaign, not directly for. and it looks like he freelanced
オピニオンの「ビューポイント」 | 杉山 蕃 vpoint.jp - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from vpoint.jp Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.