summed it up well. kamala harris was never and is still not ready for prime time. she s not ready for serious governance, serious responsibility, she was a candidate who wins do it more often than not, didn t prepare, wasn t thorough, wasn t substantive that now she has a vice president, same bad tendencies on a trip abroad when all eyes were on her, these are easily avoided mistakes but she s not serious, she s not helpful, that the only take away when you watch her in action. think about someone like amy klobuchar might have been a better choice is vice president but they went with harris because she was the first, it was historic and they are into firsts in history and i guess that is fine but you run into the bazaar of reality, you saw that. maybe they should have gone with michelle obama but their goal was to check the boxes and it shows that identity politics doesn t work but i got to tell you something, why isn t the
it more often than not. didn t prepare. wasn t thorough, wasn t substantive now she is the vice president shows those same bad tendencies on a trip abroad when all the eyes were on her. these were easily avoided mistakes. but she is gaffe prone because she is not serious. she is not thoughtful and she is not deep. i think that s the only take away when you watch her in action. rachel: you guys, i have to say. pete: amen. rachel: i agree with ari, but the whole premise of the trip was so dumb. i m going to get to the root causes of the border crisis? well, the road causes are your policies so why are you going to guatemala? just stay in your office and change all the stuff that you did to change the trump policies. pete: how arrogant to say we re going to fly in for two days and fix all your root causes. will: arrogant enough that the president of guatemala said we don t need that. rachel: root cause is not essentially in terms of what is happening at the border right now, it s not real
feel some time pressure to conclude his work and knowing that the white house would drag out fight over the subpoena. that may be an issue as well. charles: after two years of building up mueller s bona fides, his ability to get to the bottom everything, they build robert mueller up, it seems to me they are questioning the legitimacy of the report before it s even released. that s exactly what my thought was when i heard that. seems like a preemption just in case the report doesn t contain what they want on president trump, the air is not good enough answers because he wasn t forced to testify in person. there s no obligation or even wafer mueller to force the president to do that. in fact, the receipt of a written answers was something that showed that president trump was being cooperative. he is the subject of a criminal investigation. he didn t have to provide any of that at all. seems like some sort of preemption of ava doesn t have what we want, it s because the investigation
even his investigation wasn t thorough. jolly told the jury just how little that investigation had uncovered. there are no fingerprints. there s no gunshot residue tests. no dna tests, there s absolutely no evidence that links mr. smoot to it. they did state the evidence they had wasn t incriminating. the weapon he owned was the same caliber as the murder weapon, but there are however many million people in this country who own guns and this was a common weapon. the ballistics report showed there was no actual science behind it. there s no scientific evidence of that or any standards that show that. there s not currently a
make those public? i agree they are in a box. i don t think they are in a box for precisely that reason. here s why. i want to say this real fast. this is reportable, this news from north dakota. control room. never mind. we re going to ignore it. keep going. the fbi is in a box because they re going to get blamed if there s a perception that the investigation wasn t thorough. on background investigation, the terms of that are set by the white house. the white house is the client. if the white house only wants them to talk to x number of people then that s all you can do. it s not really a concern about politics or partisanship or democrats or republicans or how one or the other might feel. it s really a concern that the investigation is going to be required to be done right and well. if it s circumscribed in some