the underlying matter, but also his analysis of whether there was a crime here. if in fact the congress goes forward with the impeachment effort, the ag will be likely called to testify because he appears to be a material part of this question. that alone may be a basis for recusal. the last time a an attorney general recused from a matter involved in the president, the president got very upset. we saw the shaming of jeff sessions all over twitter. that i may take effect if the attorney general decides to recuse. eric: the democrats and those in the hill will probably be hearing from him, rather shortly. always good to see you, thank you. appreciate it. eric: we have reaction from a member of congress coming up. we ll interview him about the subpoena of mike pompeo and this
matter. she said the president has not spoken with the attorney general about having ukraine investigate anything relating to former vice president biden or his son. so that s a pretty clear statement there. you have this in usa today. quote, make no mistake, these facts now implicate the attorney general, the nation s chief law enforcement officer directly in the commission of acts that many of our country s leading legal experts consider federal crimes. whether as election law violations, bribery or other offenses concerning public corruption. the revelation of the possible involvement should alarm all of us concerned with the rule of law in this country. at a minimum, it s no longer sustainable for the attorney general to oversee the handling of the ukraine scandal. how do the facts implicate the attorney general if the doj says he wasn t involved. i think the real challenge as you point out, eric, correctly, is this question of what did the ag do and when, what was the involvemen
not clear what the ag s role if any was in this matter and the underlying matter at all. eric: the democrats say that the picture s already in, it s clear that he s doing the president s bidding, they accuse him of acting like the president s personal lawyer by the actions the justice department apparently took by not releasing this material, by not sending it to congress and you heard nancy pelosi calling it the coverup of the coverup. of tto you, does that hold any water? there s a very fair debate going on about whether or how the whistleblower complaint should have been delivered to congress. the question is whether this was a matter arising under the intelligence role of the dni. there was apparently a debate within the justice department, whether that was the case, they decided no which is why they advised the dni not to release it. it involved the use of the intelligence system at the white house where they stored the material and whether the underlying discussions came under
combine finance, is it over the amount of a donation to a candidate would likely be we re talking about millions of dollars. depending on the payment. and then it could also potentially be a question of did the president was it knowing and willfully done by him. and so that s the kind of thing they would ask. but the new york attorney general is still pressing forward with other parts other punishments that she is seeking, including a restitution. so returning money that i guess people had given to the foundation. and also banning president trump or any of his children, anybody who had served on the trump foundation board, from serving on any other charitable board in new york. is that normal? i think it s extraordinary. and let s start there. because i do think it s extraordinary. basically, what the ag is saying is they have failed in their fiduciary duties to the nonprofit organization in such an enormous way, they are not qualified to sit on the board of any nonprofit chari
lot of apartments in new york and took out some very questionable loans. and that s what the ag is investigating. and those charges or potential charges would stick regardless of a pardon. you know, ken, we ve been hearing a lot about paul manafort when it comes to the russia investigation. we ve also heard a little bit about jared kushner here and there. the name we are not hearing is mike flynn. has there been any new developments regarding him? not really, katy. it s interesting because we believe that that is an active part of the investigation and there are people around mike flynn who are of keen interest to prosecutors, but none of that has surfaced in public recently. and this administration has been trying to distance itself from paul manafort, even from mike flynn to a degree. right. how concerned are they and is there a chance that paul manafort could be somebody that the prosecution could turn? i think there s the potential that he could turn, but i think we als