and then they worked it back to the very specific points. it s like a funnel. you start very wide then go very narrow. the interview notes conclude right with the question that they wanted to ask which is, what did you say to kislyak, you know, what was that exactly? since you sort of overlooked it. and, you know, it s frustrating because you think about general flynn as head of the defense intelligence agency. he s one of the top heads of this and you say, why would he do this? why would you make phone calls overseas? he says he s on vacation and that he s really busy and he s got a poor signal. he had to make a lot of phone calls apparently. it doesn t headache amake any s from a blackberry. not a secured yeah, why were you doing business two, three weeks later, you are the national security adviser, you can do anything you want. what are you in such a hurry for to try and appease or please or build this union with russia? it doesn t make any sense. julia? let s not forget
heard rumors of an intercepted call or they picked up on it. we can t compare it to what that might be. that s the one weakness of reading the interview notes. we don t know what was said. if he admitted to lying, there was some other source that was there. let me ask you that during the interview he thanks them for the reminder. how would they have known this? let s think about this. based on what i read, this was phone calls made from a person s cell phone in a third skun try back to a diplomat, russian ambassador, sitting in washington d.c. if you re the former head of the defense intelligence agency you might think that that phone call would be heard from other people. it might suggest there could be a whole lot going on with that phone call. i don t know if there is. if you get a reminder saying,
he shouldn t. mark: meanwhile rod rosenstein is there with all kinds of conflicts. you are right, he should not recuse himself, and rod rosenstein has had a conflict from the beginning. he wrote the memo saying it is an be on vehicl obstruction of e have pointed this out. mark: he is a witness. of course, we pointed it out sunday one but mr. rosenstein, says no, it is time. we have asked for mccabe memos, sorry you are not going to see them, they have been subpoenaed, you are not going to see it, we ask to see 302s are fbi interview notes. yes, bruce ohr whose wife worked for company.
he shouldn t. mark: meanwhile rod rosenstein is there with all kinds of conflicts. you are right, he should not recuse himself, and rod rosenstein has had a conflict from the beginning. he wrote the memo saying it is an be on vehicl obstruction of e have pointed this out. mark: he is a witness. of course, we pointed it out sunday one but mr. rosenstein, says no, it is time. we have asked for mccabe memos, sorry you are not going to see them, they have been subpoenaed, you are not going to see it, we ask to see 302s are fbi interview notes. yes, bruce ohr whose wife worked for company.
the 46 pages of interview notes, he is presented with questions he as an amateur investigator could have gone back and asked these witnesses. so for democrats, they feel like this is this report, this fbi effort was a sham. it didn t do the job. it provided political cover for republicans. republicans who i talked to coming out of this meeting were almost uniform in saying zero corroboration, no corroboration, that was the sort of the code word from republicans as they were digesting this report. i don t think we re going to know what s in it until or if perhaps house democrats are in the majority in the spring of next year and they subpoena the contents. but everybody got a little bit of what they wanted politically here to continue to make their arguments, brian. we re not going to know what s in this report with any finality when the first vote gets cast tomorrow morning. sabrina, i almost forgot to mention, if republicans lost a vote this weekend, senator steve danes of montana