Stay updated with breaking news from Equivocating. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
>> those were surprises to me. blunt in particular. >> one thing that was striking is how have people up in 2020 voted against trump. >> susan collins. and she gave it the office. >> and you're -- there isn't a serious -- paula page isn't primarying here. >> mcsally in arizona. cory gardner in colorado. tom tillis in north carolina. they all voted with the president in states where it is not a general election safe to do. >> you know what i look at. i look at the georgia governor as my example during 2018. the decision -- versus dean heller in nevada, right? you worry about equivocating, the swing vote or i'm going all in with the president and hope the base carries me over the finish line. i think tom tillis is saying i have to go with the guy because i can't afford to lose him. >> i'm glad we're talking about re-election. that really say big part of
troubled and deeply offended by what just happened here in middle of the theory. was and as far as women of considerson can and i'm waiting for it and i would have stood there and and the equivocating on the part of these women, they need to find their voices quickly. that apology should never have happened. i'm waiting for the apology by mark meadows. i'm waiting for him to be and, say, president -- that is the lamest excuse to cover up racism. if he can't figure that out and apologize, i'd be still waiting for his apology.
so there was no consistency in his testimony. and of course right after saying he wasn't going to delve into the details of particular cases, he immediately started answering questions about the roger stone case and even throwing cnn into some conspiracy theory, that they're ginning up over on the gop side. so it was a very disappointing performance by the acting attorney general of the united states of america, who was dodging and equivocating and filibustering. you know, we only get five minutes to answer questions, and so he obviously had been coached to speak for as long as possible on each question. he would start by saying, thank you so much for that very thoughtful question. i really want to tell you i know how important it is to you, and on and on until finally members started saying, stop thanking us for the questions. just answer the questions. >> yeah. >> so it was a disappointment overall. >> you had some fiery moments questioning the attorney general, the acting attorney general. let's take a look at it.
from what you saw today? >> that we watched mr. whitaker be houdini-like in his escape from being straightforward. that he was equivocating throughout, that he was not giving straight forthright answers to many of the questions. yes, he said somewhat forthrightly that the president and he had not directly discussed the mueller investigation. then when it got to the question of the southern district, it started to go south a little bit. and throughout the questioning it was very clear not just his contempt and disdain for the committee and for the congress of the united states, but that he too sees this hearing as part of the battle in the cold civil war that's going on in this country, and he wants to appeal to the president's base rather than answer the questions. you know, you always have to go back to the same as donald trump, why won't donald trump speak truthfully and fully?
here. he's a maryland democrat who is a member of the committee. i'm so glad you're on. thank you, sir. >> thank you for having me, don. >> whitaker tried to make clear that he did not speak to the president about the special counsel investigation, but there were a lot of questions that he would not answer. i'm guessing you're not satisfied with what you heard. >> well, yeah. basically he invoked some kind of quasi- presidential privilege or some sort of customary right that he thought he had not to talk about conversations that he had had about the mueller investigation. but that was a principle he turned on and turned off. so there was no consistency in his testimony. and of course right after saying he wasn't going to delve into the details of particular cases, he immediately started answering questions about the roger stone case and even throwing cnn into some conspiracy theory, that they're ginning up over on the gop side. so it was a very disappointing performance by the acting attorney general of the united states of america, who was dodging and equivocating and
from being straightforward. that he was equivocating throughout, that he was not giving straight forthright answers to many of the questions. yes, he said somewhat forthrightly that the president and he had not directly discussed the mueller investigation. then when it got to the question of the southern district, it started to go south a little bit. and throughout the questioning it was very clear not just his contempt and disdain for the committee and for the congress of the united states, but that he too sees this hearing as part of the battle in the cold civil war that's going on in this country, and he wants to appeal to the president's base rather than answer the questions. you know, you always have to go back to the same as donald trump, why won't donald trump speak truthfully and fully? well, why won't mr. whitaker speak fully? there were easy questions to answer. rather, he chose throughout to
with the president. >> oh, there's the key. that may be subject to executive prif ledge and then you have this back and forth and well, then you might have to come back, and we need to you actually say this is something under which the president is going to site executive privilege. help us understand how this work and how nasty this part of it could get. >> yeah. i have a feeling we're going to hear a lot more equivocating from whitaker on whether he is or is not invoking executive privilege. this is something i expect won't get hashed out until he's invited or perhaps subpoenaed to return. i will say privileges are important in the law, because the law recognizes that there needs to be protection around certain communications. executive privilege is one example. patient/doctor privilege. attorney/client privilege. there are important society interests in protecting those
obstruction. is that right? >> yes. well, any person who persuades another. >> you said that a president or any person convincing a witness to change testimony would be obstruction. is that right? >> yes. >> no equivocating there. that direct answer both times from william barr just got a whole lot more potentially important this morning. >> absolutely, poppy. one of the reasons it got more important is that he did write a memo earlier on as we all know in which he really questioned whether these proceedings could go after trump on obstruction of justice and said the president has powers and can do a lot of things if he is acting within the presidential constitutional power, then that is not obstruction. he very carefully then agreed that there were instances that when the president could obstruct just skps one of them
in addition to the ethics news that we had today was the report. and i do appreciate that he said he wants to allow the investigation to run its course and that he says he's going to try to make the report public but there was a lot of equivocating in my private meeting with him and today in terms of well, i'll have to look at the rules and regulations. what i'm concerned about, i loved how you showed earlier in the show the redacted manafort filing with the multiple pages of just redfacting with nothing on them. that's nothing we want to see when the report gets filed and the american public should have a right to see what happened when a foreign country tried to interfere in our election and after 33 indictments, i think we know how serious this is. >> my impression watching that interaction between you and him and you and a few other season -- senators on the topic, if
who is a proud member of the democratic party. but i don't believe that we're advocating for policy. >> i did not say that. >> when you have what happened, for instance, where you had people marching and saying, jews will not replace us, and the president equivocating on it, that to me is a problem. >> i'm very heartened to see members of the left finally coming out. what is taking so long? i was at the brooklyn march that she did about a year about, where she dove tails and talks about women's right into blatant anti-semitism. why didn't the women's movement come out?