Page 896 - Wrongdoing News Today

Unprecedented impeachment process. my question is what is the most egregious gas light here? >> the idea that people are thinking indisputable means simply because i said so, it is true. for a fact to be indisputable, it means theres no evidence to support even a reasonable interpretation of that. everything that was eliminated in that line of five are things they would like to be true and would support a narrative. but because there has been support and testimony to the contrary, in fact from t...

In order to coerce a foreign leader into undertaking political investigations for his own domestic re-election, that thats okay. so i think whatever theyre faced with, fundamentally indefensible facts, all really they can do is try and divert and throw a lot of sand in the air and hope people, you know, basically cant tell fact from fiction anymore. >> laura, i almost hate to ask you this question because i dont have an 18-hour show. >> what? meaning what? am i long winded? >> no, no, no. i just...

>> laura, i almost hate to ask you this question because i dont have an 18-hour show. >> what? meaning what? am i longwinded? >> no, no, no. i just mean -- because youll understand when i ask you the question. this is the white house press secretary, stephanie grisham. she tweeted out saying these were five points that were indisputable. she says, number one, no evidence of wrongdoing by potus. number two, ukraine said there was no pressure. number three, lethal aid to ukraine wouldnt exist with...

Indisputable, it means theres no evidence to support even a reasonable interpretation of that. everything that was enumerated in that line of five are things essentially they would like to be true and would support a narrative. but because there has been support and testimony to the contrary, in fact from the president, their own readout of the transcript, the presidents tweets and at least a dozen or more witnesses have corroborated, they would like it to be true. but the idea of i know you are...

For this. to nancy pelosi, this seems clearcut, unavoidable, lets just focus on ukraine. >> focus on what is in here and whats not in here, essentially trying to quiet her own critics. anyone on the left saying we should have gone bigger and bolder, shes saying, lets just march. >> and she has the focus on these issues. the problem is shes been saying that for the last two months and it seems like they brought no one else into the ranks. if you take pelosis word for it, if its such a clearcut ca...

Abuse of power, obstructiand ob? >> obstruction, easy to understand. on the other hand you dont often see it by itself. right? you need the substantive wrongdoing and then the obstruction. i dont know. to me theyre both very, very strong and go hand in hand. i dont think anyones going to think of it as article 1, article 2. >> you think somethings missing? >> i would have liked to have seen the bribery article. the theory of the first article, abuse of power is well and good. no question this wa...

In support of both? >> i would like to read the charges before i make an announcement, but, look, ive sat through these depositions. there are plenty of -- theres plenty of evidence of the presidents wrongdoing. and i do think it rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors. but i would like the opportunity to look at the charges. you know, im not quite sure what the strategy was there to narrow it to these two, but it may be that once i read the text, some of the other charges like perhap...

American interests to serve vladimir putin in moscow. many nongenus is believed it was true. they repeated the allegation every single day for every single year because thats what they do best. but the much more interesting and important question has always been this: what did senior law enforcement officials think of the story? did they really believe it was possible that donald trump was working for russia? and if so, what evidence they have russian mark if they have no evidence, why did they ...

That was the claim. many nongenus is believed it was true. they repeated the allegation every single day for every single year because thats what they do best. but the much more interesting and important question has always been this: what did senior law enforcement officials think of the story? think of the story? did they really believe it was possible that donald trump was working for russia? and if so, what evidence they have russian mark if they have no evidence, why did they open the inves...

Investigation, when it started looking into it? was there enough there for them to dig? and the report yesterday basically saying, yes, the fbi did the right thing by starting this investigation. they acknowledge that the threshold to start an investigation is fairly low, but that that threshold was met. i think ultimately if youre the president and you look at the results of yesterday, if you could have -- if you could change anything and switch it and you could have had the political bias by t...