Stay updated with breaking news from Optics Problem. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
Putin. and is now scrutinizing. >> thanks very much. joining me now is jennifer rogers, and norm eisen. is this an optics problem? or do you see legal issues here? >> we don't know yet what the answers to the questions are. but there are profound legal and ethical and national security questions that surround thkpoor pattern.
Yesterday saying let's give the benefit of the doubt. this is probably an optics problem. as he is prone to do, the president's other lawyer blew that out of the water by saying, no, this is a strategy. we are going to benefit from this information. it is the definition of inappropriate. these are conflicted parts. >> are you saying emmett flood was sent to spy on the gang of eight. the irony here is hard to miss. come on. and so here's what the top republican who was here, mitch mcconnell, and the top democrat on the intel committee had to say about what they learned from these important clas...
Just say, badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com time for my favorite part of the show, money, power, politics. president trump never misses an opportunity to profess his deep love for tax cuts. but here's one big problem, a new "wall street journal" report says those big tax cuts included in the gop tax plan will deepen our trade deficits, something the president said he hates. joining me now, the author of that article, grip ipp, along with my panel. you say for now it's more of an optics. this is more of an optics problem than an economics problem. explain. >> trade deficit ...
Creating significant risk of overlap between his official activities and his family's business activities. and remember that he stayed invested in a number of these entities. in addition, some of the entities he divested, his lawyers talked to the press and admitted that they sold them to a trust for his family. and so it's not as though he sold them off to a third party. i mean, of course, he can't always control what his family's going to do or what they own, but he contributed to the ongoing optics problem by selling to them rather than a third party. and so you have a deeply entwined with ...
Participating in a matter like this can create an appearance that you have lost your impartiality. and people can quible over the technical reading of covered relationship and whether it apply, but there is a catch-all that certainly did apply here and in any other white house, they would certainly have had him recuse. it is rule that is easy to enforce. a person can always say i was unaware, i didn't know. but come on here, this is as common sense ethics as it gets. you don't do this. >> also there are so many facetses to this, one being that there was potentially a job on the table. if there...