this morning, which was, i was up on the hill, and a lot of her supporters were out holding a press conference, organized, i think, by linda sarsore, who is one of the leaders of the group questioning american support for israel and so forth, and championing the rights of muslim americans. and i guess looking at it, well, one thing, the first thing that impressed me is that they were all declaring victory here, because the original resolution was withdrawn, the second resolution was withdrawn. and it s now being fashioned as a condemnation of all forms of bias and by the way, a lot of these resolutions end up that way. yeah. and when steny hoyer, who s made a real effort, the number two in the house, has made a real effort to reach out to aoc and to others and so forth, i think he s one of the people who have tried to engineer this thing. they re going to come out with eventually some kind of anodyne
the president specifically want cohen to lie about this to the point that he would risk, you know, he and his team would risk altering the testimony in a way that could result in what we ve seen play out, is really at the heart of this question. you know, did the president put his business interests and therefore talk about the, you know, leader of a foreign adversary in a more congenial way or treat him in a more favorable way because he had a foreign business interest, a financial stake in that relationship that was at odds with the interests of the american people. that is what democrats have really focused in on here. and you know, cohen s team has been pretty strategic about, you know, kind of dripping out these documents. they put, you know, a set of exhibits together for that hearing last week. we saw the new york times report on checks we hadn t seen. now here another document drops into this kind of landscape. so, interesting to know what else they have held back from
done in an overlapping way. and we have not had a discussion about where those lines are and what they mean and why these tropes are as offensive as they are. but this resolution won t get us there. that s not the solution that is necessary. when i heard jake jay, when i heard you say that nancy pelosi say, well, you know, i don t believe she intended to be matthew, i don t want to i don t want to speak for you, but i can hear every conservative friend of mine going, conservatives are never giving the same benefit of the doubt on this, too. and that is sort of always the issue here, when there is this finger pointing. which is, each side is willing to give their own bad guys or gals more of a benefit of the doubt than the other side. and therefore, hypocrisy reins. and it opens the door for more extreme statements on the part of representative omar. how many times are we prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt? the democrats gave her that for her tweet saying that israe
run against the incumbent. howard, the thing i just modeled is the resiliency of this 35 to 37%. by the way, it s always been that number. wherever we ve asked about russia, the core number is under 40, right around 35. those people, and i spent a lot of time at trump rallies during the campaign, they believe donald trump is an instrument to change the power structure in america. that however imperfect he might be, and by the way, they don t think he s imperfect, but however imperfect he might be, he is the type of person, and at this point, the only one on the horizon, as he said during the campaign hey, they re giving you hell! i am the only one who can fix this. and that s what those people believe. and i think they like the idea that we re irritated. i m not kidding. i ve had plenty of people saying, that s fine. it s almost as if we stopped covering it, maybe they would be upset. look, we re going to sneak in a break here. we ll keep an eye on that door
actually the proper way it s like, look, kocongress isn t gog to go into this. here you go, american public. it s almost like their version of the mueller report. mueller, hey, it s on you. now congress is like, no, no, no, no, congress, it s on you. you decide what to do with him. that s the role of congress. that s the difference between these committees and robert mueller is that they are fact finding and presenting this information to the public. they also have that option to, if they find a crime, to make article of impeachment, but that s why the senate is there, because that s where it would there s no way that they would approve it. it would go down. and so, ultimately, that s a lot that s what this is about. the robert mueller probe something entirely different. and we don t know. at the end of the day, we don t know if a president can be indicted or not, legally, yes, that s the doj s position. that s another legal battle that might be fought. the pigge estbiggest t