Page 27 - Serious Question News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

So, lots of room for complete clashes of statements prior, current and future. >> and, ashley, does your reporting take it as established fact that we have two parallel tracks going on here? we have whatever the president is saying about the possibility of an interview with robert mueller, and we have the reality, and that is that attorneys from both sides are talking about the scope of the kinds of questions that will be asked at the inevitable interview of donald trump? >> that's right. i think the second track is both the far more intriguing track, and the far more reality-based one. the tr...

Re-authorization, meaning there are no changes, just reup the existing law. they didn't get that. but the main thrust of the support for more restrictions was in the house, and the votes were really not expected to be in the senate. rand paul says he's going to filibuster anything that doesn't have strict protections. we have to see how that's going to play out. i think it's going to pass. people believe it's going to pass. the president said he's going to sign it. the question becomes how will the fbi actually implement this new tweak in the law that says they have to get a warrant in certain...

I mean, he was there. corey lewandowski had more to do with it, close quote. speaking of lewandowski, there are reports the house committee wants to speak with him along with first daughter and white house aide ivanka trump. as for the president, he continues to dodge questions about his willingness to speak with special counsel robert mueller. this is what he said back in june. >> would you be willing to speak under oath to give your version of -- >> 100%. >> so, if robert mueller wanted to speak to you about that -- >> i would be glad to tell him exactly what i just told you. >> that was the...

>> but the 4th amendment talks about the need to get a warrant for u.s. persons on u.s. soil to state with particularity, the thing you're looking for and what you expect to find. it precludes unreasonable searches. so, the question really is, is searching or listening to or intercepting the communications of a foreign person on foreign soil for foreign intelligence purposes unreasonable? and the answer overwhelmingly in the courts of the united states is no. that's perfectly reasonable. it's not a 4th amendment issue. no warrants required. it's really as simple as that. >> jeremy, we have wel...

To speak to you about that -- >> i would be glad to tell him exactly what i just told you. >> that was then, sunny day in the rose garden. today when asked that exact question in his "wall street journal" interview, he would say only this. quote, look, there has never been in the history of this country an administration that, number one, did nothing wrong, and number two, was more open with a special counsel. here to talk about all of that, ashley parker, white house reporter for the washington post and an msnbc political analyst. and frank faglusi is with us, former fbi director for count...