so vivid, isn t it? essentially means you buy a story in order to bury a story. so you re an editor of a tabloid. someone comes in with the story and you buy what s called life rights. this gives you publication exclusive rights to tell this person s story, in this case, this playboy model s story. cara mcdougal sells her life, right, she signed a contract, agreed to it. she now says she seems to regret it, she didn t know what she was signing away. when a magazine like the national enquirer buys the rights to something like this, it essentially then buried the story. it s called catch and kill. first you catch the story, then you kill the story. we know she was paid $150,000. ronin farrow s reporting has joined some earlier reporting by the wall street journal that documents what went on here. the question i have is how many other times has the enquirer done this? caught and then killed in order
listen. he would joke because we would be looking at photos and joke about he would joke about the photos and stuff. i really want to be there for him. i really did. i wish i felt like i could have stopped it. i know it wasn t my fault but i felt like i could have stopped it. i could have been there for him. 17 people wouldn t have lost their lives. casey, sadly, there are a lot of people who are almost expressing like a guilt. they didn t know what to do with that information. the fbi, the director even saying that they did receive a tip in january and it just didn t follow protocol. whether it s an issue of it wasn t taken seriously or if this is an administrative problem, et cetera but, you know, how do you explain that when there is information in which to act upon, it s just not acted upon? what do you want them to do to act upon it?
$1.2 million per month trying to influence the election. they were organizing rallies. they were putting out false information. they were sowing divisiveness. after these indictment, if the president doesn t acknowledge that and he still has not. i mean, russia can t take it seriously either and we ll proceed with upcoming 2018 potential interference, right? yes, i think he has. i think his statement was a step towards acknowledgement. h.r. mcmaster has said there s no doubt the russians have meddled in the election. it strikes me the trump national security apparatus gets it here but what do you do with that information? if the president could take a pro active step to put a group of people together whose only job for the next two years was to stop this from happening in the future that would be a great step that i would think would unify the country on this collusion issue. i know this, the russians are meddling and we ve got to stop them because they are hostile to the uni
unstable, had scary tendencies. but never were able to get the message through to anyone who could actually do something about it. it s not he was sort of hiding in plain sight. it s easier to see this of course in retrospect than it is at the moment. but in all the cases i ve studied, these kinds of warning signs are everywhere. the body armor. the virginia tech shooter had, you know, pictures of himself in exactly the same kinds of positions with the same kind of body armor. we just need to know what we do when we see those signs and make sure the people who see them can come forward to people who can do something about it in law enforcement, in school administration and among the adults they trust in their own families. it s really in step with what you re saying redefining kind of the warning signs, you know, what reaches that level of true concern, you know, one of the shooter s friends says that the shooter actually laughed about prior school shootings.
whereas in the past it was difficult to attribute for a couple of reasons. first, technically, it was difficult, but then also you didn t want to divulge your intelligence capabilities. but now that this is in the arena of a law enforcement investigation, it s going to be very apparent to everyone. i did want to bring up the president s tweet, fred. there are two things to point out here. first, the president writes that the trump campaign did nothing wrong, there was no collusion. that s still not conclusive. if you listen closely to what the deputy attorney general said yesterday, he said in this indictment, there were no americans named who wittingly worked with russians to interfere in the election. but it doesn t say that there are no more indictments coming in the future. in fact, rod rosenstein said yesterday the special counsel s investigation is still ongoing. you ll notice in the president s tweet, there s no condemnation of russia. there s no indication the