Page 336 - Implication News Today

Secondly women as a group, they do have kids and have a greater -- >> we men care about more? >> the other day in the polling 60% of women said trump should be impeached. >> lets do the other side. what do men care about? >> money. >> men are better with money than women are? >> you asked me about care. i didnt say better. >> if you care about money its because you want to handle it in a better way. that implies that women cant do it. >> do you care about financial will being and opportunity and...

Government and i was left conspicuously out of the inquiry. he should be concerned about that. but ive been saying for many weeks now that rudy giuliani is getting into issues here because hes trying to wear too many hats. what is rudy giuliani? is he a -- a -- a private member of the state department? is he the presidents personal lawyer? is he a businessman trying to make money in ukraine? or is he a lobbyist of some kind for foreign interests or receiving some benefit from foreign interest? i...

>> if you hate donald trump that much that youre willing to sacrifice the constitution over it, that is a dangerous precedent. >> jenna, let me make one thing clear to you, all right? this show is about respecting the law. you said earlier we dont need personal attacks to make a point. the idea that you have to allege that people hate this president because they dont agree with him -- >> thats not what i said. >> thats the implication. i get the simple implication. >> i stand by my word. >> i th...

>> thats the implication. i get the simple implication. >> i stand by my word. >> i think you said it for a reason. thank you both. have good thanksgivings. another legal situation to take up, the presidents lawyer rudy giuliani. is he a target, a subject? whats going on with the investigation? we now know more. we have reporting about whats in the subpoenas. now in those documents, they have to give a range of potential problems and what they could mean in terms of charges and how they could fo...

Her finding. >> whats significant is the white houses claim that for a broad array of senior advisers to the president, not only dont they have to testify about conversations with the president, they dont even have to appear. they have, as the opinion said, absolute immunity. that is they dont even have to show up. and judge jackson completely rejected that theory and said, yes, they do under article 2 of the constitution. the president does not have that right under article 1, congress does hav...

Us understand the implication of the new court ruling that could bring all these witnesses to the stand. coming up, with friends like lindsey graham, who needs enemies? what happened to friendship? graham and joe biden used to be close buddies. >> hes a decent man but were not going to live in a world where just donald trump and his family gets looked at, were going to look in a world where everybody gets looked at if there is a question reasonably to be asked. >> well, they used to be buds. u...

So, he made what appeared to be a threat. guiliani said, hes got insurance, thats his word, that will protect him if trump decides to throw him under the bus. >> have you talked to president trump in the last week or two? have you met with him? are you still he is counsel? >> i do not discuss my conversations with my client. you can assume that i talk to him early and often. yeah. and have a very, very good relationship with him and all of these comments which are totally insulting. >> yeah. >> ...

I really think time to rip the band-aid off here. there has been a great deal of concern about all of this. these are cases that involve allegations of war crimes. now, does the president of the united states have the legal right as commander in chief to step in, intervene, and order people to be kept on their s.e.a.l. status, order them to have their rank restored in the other cases, order them pardon? of course he has the right as commander in chief. but what we keep hearing is just because he...

Like the white house is trying to cover something up. >> just to add, i watched adam schiff the chairman of the house intelligence committee with jake yesterday. and jake asked him about this. because there is a "new york times" op-ed and there is uneasiness chatter of are they moving too fast and waiting for the rulings to come down because as susan mentioned, this is don mcgahn but obviously will have some implication with mulvaney, pompeo, giuliani, et cetera, vis-a-vis ukraine. his answer wa...

An insurance policy. now hes tweeted to try to explain that he meant hes got stuff on the bidens. if he had anything on the bidens, he would have made it public by now. the implication in the original comment was that he had stuff on the president that he could release if the president tried to throw him under the bus. >> right. that wouldnt be much of an insurance policy, would it? just more broadly, the whole thing is such a total snake pit now. you have a couple weeks in which facts were esta...