its masking given the delta variant. this tweet points out it did. the writer calls out fauci for confusion on how many masks are suggested claiming it depends on when you ask fauci what that answer would be. he also highlights some other contradictory messages. fair to say there is a reasonable amount of confusion out there, dr. siegel? and to some extent isn t it the cdc s own fault for that? yes, it is because of poor messaging and mixed messaging and changing messages. but i also think that there is no taking into account something i would call mask fatigue. people were told okay, get back to normal. we re over this and we re reopening and bam, suddenly to go in the other direction without a, an idea what it would do to the psyche of the country, b, people aren t going to comply with the masks anyway
take her down, it could take pelosi and possibly her husband important and this tweet points to is 2020 will be an honest election which means socialism as well. yeah, if you think about and american capitalism and that is a good thing for the american this, there s a lot of people to have a real honest government people we re learning choice where people aren t masking what they are really more and more who end up conduct ing some of their official duties on their private about, i hope they vote for a, e-mail. some types it s just because of quote, progressive which means the necessity of a moment in time when, you know, you only socialist meaning we can have a have your private e-mail with real debate. you and you have to respond to we have been talking for months in terms of this show, something and ms. of that stuff is okay as long as a copy of the there are no blue dog democrats, e-mail makes it into the file but this is a situation where the democrat party has moved to the le
insurance policy after a meeting with andrew mccabe. and as the president s tweet points out, he had an inherent conflict as a result of his wife getting all of this cash from the clinton machine. what are you looking for? what do you think said text messages could reveal? i think they re going to show specifically in our case how the clinton e-mail information was wired and stifled by fbi leadership to include mr. mccabe. so you say the president tweeted, as you saw, may need to get involved, do not destroy. could that include the declassification he could declassification anything, right? this isn t declassification. this is look at the text messages, see if there are documents responsive to our freedom of information act and turn them over. declassification is down the road. they don t want to look at the pile of the documents. so the president is right to be annoyed of this real violation
would begin to put controls in place immediately and create a 90-day period to review and assess the ideal system of controls to keep this country dry safe. brian: you say nothing differently but did you come out and say green card holders you can now pass go. you can come in. that s never changed. 170 people applied for green card waiver overseas. 107 people got it to be clear these are people who already have green cards. not people applying for new green cards. that policy has been consistent from the beginning. the media, other networks sowed some confusion. the reality is that internally we have honored every request for admission for individuals who have green cards from overseas. steve: terrific. steven to the president s tweet points there were 109 people that were in transit because, right now, if you are in another country and you re from one of those countries on the list you are not going to be allowed to get on a plane. of those 109 people who are in transit, was the thi
on she was mistaken. legal experts tell eyewitness news there are many issues holmes has to overcome. tweets are often gossip not taken for the truth. also whether courtney love s statements would be considered by the public as credibility. this as s miriam hernandez reporting for abc news. pretty interesting case. it really is. it s probably going to have to meet all the legal standards, and i m no expert, but was there intended malice here, it s going to have to meet the standards of liable would have to meet. i think it s interesting, a lot of people kind of forget how many others are reading what they put out there on social media. so if it s just like a ranting thing, you put it out there and forget about it, but you forget that could be retweeted over and over and you really don t know how far it s spreading. right. there s a big difference between saying this is my opinion and stating something fact that s wrong. so very interesting case. interesting tweet points as