Everybody. What more can you tell us about this . You were given this information or permission by the senator or by his family in order to broadcast this . Yes, they with his permission, i spoke to the doctors they ask that i talk to the doctors get the information about what happened. We know that on friday morning he went to the doctors basically for a scheduled annual physical exam. He was complaining a bit of fatigue and said hes been feeling tired over the last few months. He also had a bout of double vision. But because of those things his doctors decided to order a cat scan of his brain. This is all friday this happened. It was that cat scan and an a subsequent mri scan of the vain that revealed this abnormality. It was concerning enough that urgently, within the next couple of hours, the doctors took him to the operating room, they per
performed the incision in the left eyebrow area, removed some intone they believed they removed the entire tumor they could see from the area o
6th and it s hard to imagine him writing a book and not writing about january 6th then he clearly is waiving his claim he has to keep confidential his communications with the former president or what happened in the white house. after all, if he can say it in a book, why can t he say it before congress in an investigation? but, don, he s not the first to potentially try. you might remember john bolton refused to testify in the house because he wanted to save it for his book. and only after he realized that he might never his book might not see the light of day because the trump white house was trying to refuse to certify that it wasn t classified did he offer to testify before the senate, i think in the hopes that that would pierce the executive branch s ability to suppress his book. yeah. congressman, seeing this reporting that med dozen was trying to get government officials to pursue baseless fraud conspiracies. at one point he reached out to the fbi, the pentagon, the
can t he say it before congress and the investigation? he is not the first to potentially try. you may remember john bolton refused to testify in the house because he wanted to save it for his book and only after he realized he might ever his book might not see the light of day because the trump white house was trying to refuse to certify it wasn t classified did he offer to testify before the senate i think in the hopes that would pierce the executive branch s ability to suppress his book. cnn is reporting meadows was trying to get government officials pursue baseless election fraud conspiracies. according to one source he reached out to the fbi, the pentagon, national security council, office of the director of national intelligence, also pressured the justice department. those are not conversations with trump. should he be able to answer questions about contacts with those officials? i don t think those would be
he said nothing could have been different. then you look in the media. what do you see? well, it s without sourcing, anonymous sources, but it s clear that general milley wants to make clear that he wanted 2,500 troops. secretary austin told the president that full withdrawal could lead to instability. the intelligence community had been warning biden for months. that wasn t classified. you could have read that on the front page of any national newspaper. we all knew. then you have the secretary of state and the national security adviser making it clear that they warned and potential taliban attacks on u.s. diplomats and allies. thought it was discordant. the secretary of defense indicates that they have better control over it. what is strange, i saw the state department briefing. sounds like the taliban was not allowing people through and then we have our own reporting. people that now they have cell phones and they can call and
classified as terrorism. this is something federal prosecutors have been saying in court, they say this meets the legal definition. they call this a domestic terrorism incident. and their prosecutors are typically handle domestic terrorism cases assigned to it, and they re handling it as a domestic terrorism instance but they will be careful when they deployed that charge. that s a politically loaded charge that you want to be careful about deploying it properly. there is no other way to describe what happened on january 6th, so what they were trying to do was influence the government. this is a violent act inference influence the government s actions. it s hard to get away from that definition but that is by the book sweat it is. ryan. good to see you, riley is the justice reporter at huffington post. but next, a story rachel s been following closely. stay with us. stay with us owing,