Page 4 - Fact Question News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

Featherweight to mention here, the president's a crook. that's not really how it goes down. >> the way this is going to work does exactly as john said and as representative lue said, getting robert mueller to really focus his attention on just say what the report says in key parts. it's not the 448 pages. it's the you said that there were people who materially lied and some of them you brought charges against. how many other lied that you didn't bring charges against? i mean, i would really -- you can ask the question in a way that focuses the attention and just asks him to answer a fact quest...

Chris, i don't think that report exists. i don't think you can get all four of those virtues together. and so we're going to be faced with an incomplete report, a misleading report or a report that threatens the relationship or i think most likely a report that threatens our relationship with the crown prince. >> well, you have to think -- >> because of what he knew. >> you have to think, >> you have to think, general, the president has given signal to the prince he has good cushion. he advanced the rogue actors thing. he advanced that salman had nothing to do with it. he put it out there that...

Exonerate the crowned prince. chris, i don't think that report exists. i don't think you can get all four of those virtues together. we'll be faced with an incomplete report and misleading report. or a report that threatens the relationship or most likely a report that threatens our relation shi relationship with the crowned prince. >> you have to think, general, the president has given signal to the prince he has good cushion. he advanced the rogue actors thing. he advanced that salman had nothing to do with it. he put it out there that khashoggi is not a u.s. citizen. yes, he worked for a u....

>> well, and that could become a fact question that robert mueller decides. if he concludes that money was paid for the purpose of keeping this quiet, lots of indications indicate so, the question of what was the intent is ultimate lir ly a question of whether this would be prosecutable. if it's for family reasons, it's not a campaign finance violation. but look at the timing, look at the facts. he was gunning to be president of the united states. that's plenty of circumstantial evidence. >> all right. i do want to get to stormy daniels' appearance last night, the cameo on "saturday night live...

Assuming it is one. this is not the crime of the century, its relatively small potatoes. bradley is more of an expert on the election law than i am and i always thought the test was, is it for the purpose of influencing the campaign? so it's always a question if you do something 11 days before the campaign, but it's relatively a fact question. and by no means would be easy to prove. but again, in the grand scheme of things, it's relatively minor. i can't imagine any president being impeached, much less prosecuted for a felony for that. it doesn't change the fact that rudy isn't really talking ...