yeah, and what i meant by that is the degree to which they had to entertain the reservations of field agents who werere scared of trump even thoh they had the evidence that, you know, a raid a search very much made sense. that s a great point, and i think it s great goingt, throug the time line at least according to the reporting which is there s an indication the department of justice in may wanting to proceed with a search warrant and instead the decision was made according to this reporting that let s do a spoona instead. and it turns out that going for the subpoena was the right decision. not only did they obtain evidence, but it turns out that this is where sort of the evidence of obstruction comes to light. in fact, it justifies further justifies this decision to conduct ath search. and so, in fact, just one other piece which is one of the
well, what stuck out the most is that they were individuals, senior officials who were part of this deliberation that chose to leak this information right at the time that the department of justice and fbi are likely making a charging decision. a debate, deliberation, disagreement as mentioned is s common, does occur. but when you have a leak like this, it undermines the integrity of the u investigatio. importantly how do those individuals, those same individuals go into s the room d have an honest and candid discussion about charges knowing that there were people who if they don t if the decision goes against them, if there s a disagreements that they may ai their dpreefbances publicly? and i think it s sort of a
the company s ceo said the decision came as a result of conversations between the company and members of congress. the company may also have been spurred to act because now non-profits and startups and even the california state government are all set to start making their own cheaper insulin imminently. now all of that would probably not be happening if it weren t from everyone to activists to internet trolls being incredibly loud on this issue for years now. we shouldn t lose sight of that. public pressure works. still to come tonight, explosive new reporting and investigation into the man nicknamed donald trump s judge whisperer. that is coming up next. whisperer. that is coming up next
political pressure push it into doing things and handle an investigation in ways it wouldn t otherwise conduct, and the hillary clinton investigation probable the most prominent example but probably not the only person in the department who made decisions about that case because of the pressure they were getting from republicans on capitol hill. once you start departing from the way you would conduct investigations and start doing things because people on the hill are saying put resources here, not where the facts or the law justify resources being spent, you really start to make mistakes that can come to mark your tenure and have very difficult to undo. i wonder what you made of tom cotton s saying they re too busy and they should spend some of that time in human capitol investigating people who were protesting outside justices home after the supreme court dobbs decision. thursday an answer to that. no matter what you think about
story. i think the story is that you have both the department of justice and fbi o proceeding carefully and cautiously as they should in conducting a search not a raid, a search of a former president s residence. it should be careful and cautious. and to that end it s important to note that the right decision was reached here. like, this search happened. and we talked about sort of the politics in this. the all the reporting from special counsel jack smith is that the investigation proceeding full t speed ahead aggressively bringing people in of the grand jury, bringing attorneys of the former president inrm front of the gra jury. and so it strikes me ultimately this is an investigation that should proceed carefully and cautiously, a and i don t think we ve seen anything at least in this investigation that screams politics or sort ofn politics inappropriately or unfairly affecting the investigation.