this lead at the opposition, a former director of public prosecutions, mr speaker, spent most of his time prosecuting journalists and notjimmy savile. there s no evidence to support what mrjohnson said. and in her resignation letter, munira mirza writes. i believe it was wrong for you to imply this week that keir starmer was personally responsible for allowing jimmy savile to escape justice. there was no fair or reasonable basis for that assertion. and munira mirza s says her resignation isn tjust about the allegation. it s about what s happened since. this was the deputy prime minister on tuesday describing what happened the day before. this is the cut and thrust of parliamentary debates and exchanges. in response, munira mirza writes. this was not the usual cut and thrust of politics; it was an inappropriate and partisan reference to a horrendous case of child sex abuse. and on wednesday, the prime minister was challenged by keir starmer. now their leader stands in the house of
and i, the taxpayer, paid to oppose the government. that s of the leading opposition is, paid by the taxpayer to oppose the government, and what you get is you can t even walk in the street without being vilified and threatened. and if our society is treating democracy as nastily and disgusting is that, than the prime minister, what he says in the prime minister, what he says in the house of commons has to bear some responsibility, and on that basis, he should withdraw them remark. ., ~ , basis, he should withdraw them remark. ., ~ , ., basis, he should withdraw them remark. ., ~ , ., ~ basis, he should withdraw them remark. ., ~ , ., ~ , remark. how like they do think it is he well? keys remark. how like they do think it is he well? keys had remark. how like they do think it is he well? keys had to remark. how like they do think it is he well? keys had to apologise - remark. how like they do think it is he well? keys had to apologise in l he well? keys had to apologise in pa
them from issuing subpoenas to have journalists testify except in very, very rare cases and what jeff sessions is call more reporters to the sand and prosecute them if they refuse to testify. and he also talked about prosecuting journalists. they re just keeping the door open to the possibility. does that concern you, matt? i think what we heard from rod rosenstein this morning and what we heard from jeff sessions is that they are doing a review on what their authority is and what it is not. i do find it quite ironic that obama can prosecute so many leakers but yet jeff sessions wants to continue this trend and it s a horrible travesty of the first amend. we were horribly critical of
Detailed text transcripts for TV channel - CNN - 20170804:22:02:00 comparemela.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from comparemela.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
john king, how rare is it for whether it s intelligence agencies, fbi for there to be leaks from, you know, all around in washington? there are always leaks in washington. this is the way it goes. you want to go back to the pentagon papers. you want to go back to any big story in washington. there are leaks in washington. go back to watergate. there are leaks in washington. often those leaks shed light on something that the public deserves to know. are they sometimes controversial? of course. the obama administration is facing controversy for prosecuting journalists and going after journalists who ve been at some of these national security leaks. leaks are a time-honored tradition and some would say a problem and some say great thing in washington. cnn called its book on the presidential election unprecedented for a reason. everything about the election just about was unprecedented including this story, including this investigation, including how it was handled, including as