GOOD EVENING ONCE AGAIN FROM OUR HEADQUARTERS HERE IN NEW YORK.
DAY 96 OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION AN IT'S ALL
TURNED BACK TO RUSSIA AGAIN AND MIKE FLYNN.
THE TOP DEMOCRAT AND THE TOP REPUBLICAN IN THE HOUSE
OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE SAY TRUMP'S FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER
MAY HAVE BROKEN THE LAW BY NOT DISCLOSING MONEY HE MADE FROM
RUSSIA AND TURKEY. HOW MUCH MONEY?
QUOTE, FLYNN RECEIVED $45,000 IN DECEMBER OF 2015 TO SPEAK AT A
RUSSIA TV EVENT. HE ALSO RECEIVED MORE THAN
$500,000 FOR LOBBYING FOR THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT.
BOTH CHAIRMAN JASON CHAFFETZ AND ELIJAH CUMMINGS TAUKDSAUKDS ABO
FLYNN WITH MSNBC TODAY. >> AS GENERAL FLYNN WAS REQUIRED
TO PROACTIVELY ASK PERMISSION PRIOR TO ENGAGING WITH RUSSIA
AND TURKEY. NOT ONLY WAS HE SUPPOSED TO ASK
FOR PERMISSION, HE WAS SUPPOSED TO GET PERMISSION AND HE DIDN'T.
AND SO THIS GOES BACK FOR, YOU KNOW, A YEAR PRIOR TO DONALD
TRUMP EVER BECOMING THE PRESIDENT.
SO IT'S NOT AS IF THE WHITE HOUSE ISN'T RESPONDING.
THERE JUST AREN'T DOCUMENTS AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
>> DO YOU THINK MICHAEL FLYNN BROKE THE LAW?
>> IT DOESN'T APPEAR AS IF HE COMPLIED WITH THE LAW.
I DON'T SEE EVIDENCE THAT HE COMPLIED WITH THE LAW.
>> THIS IS NOT SOME WITCH HUNT. THIS IS ABOUT A FIGHT FOR THE
SOUL OF OUR DEMOCRACY. AND I WANT TO BE REAL CLEAR ON
THAT. WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO IS MAKE
SURE THAT WE PURSUE THIS INVESTIGATION AND GO WHERE THE
EVIDENCE LEADS. OUR NEXT STEP IS TO HOPEFULLY
SIT DOWN WITH THE WHITE HOUSE AND EXPLAIN TO THEM THAT THEY
DON'T DETERMINE WHAT WE INVESTIGATE AS A CONGRESS, WE
DO. >> SEAN SPICER WAS ALSO PRESSED
ON THIS TODAY DURING THE WHITE HOUSE BRIEFING.
>> THE PRESIDENT FEEL THAT HE WAS MISLED BY GENERAL FLYNN?
>> I THINK THE PRESIDENT MADE A DECISION A WHILE AGO BECAUSE
FLYNN WAS NOT STRAIGHT WITH THE VICE PRESIDENT AT THE TIME AND
LET HIM GO. I THINK HE STANDS BY THAT
DECISION AND IT'S UP TO OTHERS TO REVIEW ALL OF THE INFORMATION
THAT'S COMING OUT. >> DOES HE NOW FEEL THAT HE ALSO
WASN'T STRAIGHT WITH HIM -- >> A LOT OF THE FACTS ARE STILL
COMING OUT. I KNOW THE PRESIDENT MADE A
DECISION A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, IT WAS THE RIGHT DECISION AND
WE'VE MOVED ON AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO STAY FOCUSED ON --
>> AT THE TIME HE MADE THE DECISION HE SAID THAT FLYNN WAS
A VICTIM OF A MEDIA WITCH ITCH SAID HE WAS A GOOD MAN.
DOES HE STILL FEEL THAT WAY? >> ALL OF THE FACTS ARE COMING
OUT ON THAT. I THINK HE MADE A DECISION A FEW
MONTHS AGO AND STANDS BY THAT DECISION.
>> ON THE SENATE SIDE, RICHARD BURR TALKED TO REPORTERS ON THE
HILL TODAY. WHILE HE WOULDN'T SAY WHETHER HE
THINKS MICHAEL FLYNN BROKE THE LAW, HE DID DISCUSS THE ISSUE OF
IMMUNITY. >> IS THERE ANY WAY YOU GIVE
FLYNN IMMUNITY TO TESTIFY? >> NO.
>> THERE'S NO WAY? >> NO.
>> WOULD SUBPOENA HIM TO -- >> ANYBODY WHO HAS AT LEAST BEEN
ASSOCIATED IN SOME WAY, SHAPE OR FORM THROUGH NEWS ARTICLES HAVE
WALKED IN THE DOOR VOLUNTEERING TO TESTIFY OR PUBLICLY SAID THEY
WOULD LOVE TO TESTIFY. I DON'T SEE THE NEED FOR ANY
TYPE OF SUBPOENA PROCESS. >> LET'S BRING IN TONIGHT'S
PANEL. THE DEPUTY NATIONAL SECURITY
ADVISER DURING THE GEORGE W. BUSH ADMINISTRATION, NOW HE'S
MSNBC'S SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF
AT THE PENTAGON AND THE CIA, JEREMY BASH, AND HOST OF NPR'S
INDIVISIBLE. JUAN AND JEREMY AND I HAVE
FILLED OUT THE PAPERWORK THAT YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT IF YOU ARE
GOING TO WORK IN THE WHITE HOUSE AND LOOK AT SECRET STUFF.
THIS IS THE REALLY, REALLY BIG. THERE'S A QUESTION I WANT TO PUT
ON THE SCREEN. BECAUSE IT SAYS DO YOU HAVE OR
HAVE YOU HAD CLOSE OR CONTINUING CONTACT WITH A FOREIGN NATIONAL
WITHIN THE LAST SEVEN YEARS. NOW THERE ARE ALSO QUESTIONS
ABOUT WHETHER YOU HAVE ANY FINANCIAL GAIN FROM ANY FOREIGN
POWER. JUAN, EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THE
WHITE HOUSE CAN'T PRODUCE THIS DOCUMENT THAT COULD HOLD OPEN A
VERY HEAVY DOOR. >> WELL I THINK THERE'S SOME --
SEVERAL ISSUES HERE AT PLAY, NOT ONLY WITH RESPECT TO GENERAL
FLYNN'S LEGAL LIABILITY BUT ALSO QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT CONTACT SHE
WAS HAVING PERHAPS EVEN ON BEHALF OF THE PRESIDENT OR THE
WHITE HOUSE. AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE YOU
HAVE SOME OF THE DEBATE AND DISCUSSION.
BECAUSE I THINK THERE HAVE BEEN REQUESTS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT
CONTACTS GENERAL FLYNN WAS HAVING ON BEHALF OF THEN
PRESIDENT-ELECT AND THEN ALSO TRUMP AS HE SERVED AS THE
NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER. BUT WITH RESPECT TO THE FORM
ITSELF, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE WHITE HOUSE.
I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY AREN'T PRODUCING IT.
I'M SURE THEY WILL HAVE TO AT SOME POINT TO THE COMMITTEES
INVESTIGATING THIS. AND NO DOUBT THIS IS GOING TO BE
FURTHER SUBJECT OF CONSIDERATION, GIVEN THE FACT
THAT'S A PRETTY CLEAR QUESTION. BUT IT COULD BE THAT THERE WAS
CONFUSION ON THE PART OF GENERAL FLYNN, WHO KNOWS.
BUT AT THIS POINT -- >> CONFUSION.
I FILLED THIS FORM OUT TWICE. I WENT TO WORK IN THE WHITE
HOUSE AND THEN I GOT MARRIED AND WENT BACK TO THE WHITE HOUSE.
ON MY HONEYMOON I WENT TO TURKEY AND BOUGHT A RUG.
I REMEMBER HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER THAT CONSTITUTED
ANY SORT OF CONTACT WITH A FOREIGN AGENT.
PEOPLE WHO WORK IN THE GOVERNMENT TAKE THESE FORMS
SERIOUSLY AND YOU'RE INTERVIEWED BY FBI AGENTS AFTERWARD.
HOW DID MICHAEL FLYNN GET THE NEEDED SECURITY CLEARANCES TO BE
PRESENT IN DONALD TRUMP'S BRIEFINGS DURING THE TRANSITION
WITHOUT HAVING A CURRENT AND ACCURATE BACKGROUND CHECK FORM
ON FILE? >> WELL, NICOLE, YOU'RE
IMMINENTLY CORRECT. THIS IS A HUGE RED FLAG.
IT'S NOT THE ONLY TIME WE'VE HAD RED FLAGS REGARDING GENERAL
FLYNN. FIRST HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE THE
INFORMATION ON HIS CLEARANCE FORM.
HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE THIS ON HIS ETHICS FORM, HIS OGE 278
FORM. HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE HIS WORK
UNDER THE FOREIGN AGENT'S
REGISTRATION ACT ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF TURKEY.
THAT IS TLE FORMS THAT WERE INCOMPLETE, SLOPPILY FILLED OUT
OR PURPOSELY INCORRECT. AND THEN OF COURSE HE FAILED TO
COMPLY WITH THE CONSTITUTIONAL AND POLICY REQUIREMENT TO GO
BACK TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, BACK TO THE PENTAGON AND
SEEK TO OBTAIN PAYMENTS FROM A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT WHICH EVERY
SINGLE MILITARY GENERAL OFFICER, EVEN PEOPLE I WORK WITH HAVE TO
DO ALL OF THE TIME. SO WHEN YOU'RE FOUR FOR FOUR IT
REALLY STRAINS KRA DUALITY TO SAY HE WAS JUST SLOPPY.
>> I WANT TO GET YOU BACK IN ON THIS, JUAN.
YOU HAVE DEEP TIE TO THIS ADMINISTRATION'S SECURITY
OFFICIALS. AND I KNOW YOU WERE AN INFORMAL
OR FORMAL ADVISER DURING THE TRANSITION.
I DON'T WANT TO GET THAT WRONG. >> FORMAL, TO DIRECTOR POMPEO AT
THE CIA. WHAT CONCERNS DID YOU HEAR ABOUT
GENERAL FLYNN, IF ANY? >> WELL I DON'T THINK I CAN
SPEAK TO ANYTHING I WAS HEARING DURING THAT TIME PERIOD, NICOLE.
I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT. BUT I THINK CERTAINLY THERE WERE
QUESTIONS ABOUT GENERAL FLYNN IN TERMS OF HIS CAPACITY IN THAT
ROLE. KEEP IN MIND HE WAS A VERY
SUCCESSFUL MILITARY INTELLIGENCE OFFICER.
BUT HAD NOT SERVED IN A POLICY ROLE AND CERTAINLY HAD NOT BEEN
AT THOSE LEVELS AND CERTAINLY NOT WORKED IN THE WHITE HOUSE.
THERE WERE QUESTIONS AND IN GENERAL IN THE POLICY COMMUNITY
ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS READY FOR THIS ROLE.
KEEP IN MIND AS WELL, THIS MAY HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE
FORMS. HE HAD JUST RECENTLY RETIRED OR
BEEN ASKED TO LEAVE AS HEAD OF THE DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY.
HE THEN TOOK ON PRIVATE PRACTICE AND THENN RETURNED BACK FAIRLY
QUICKLY THEREAFTER. IT'S IN THAT PERIOD WHERE HE WAS
ENGAGED IN ALL OF THESE ACTIVITIES THAT HE'S GOTTEN INTO
TROUBLE WITH. AND IT MAY BE THAT HE WAS NOT
PREPARED TO RETURN PROPERLY AND HAD NOT CHECKED NOT ONLY ALL OF
THE FORMS PROPERLY BUT HAD NOT THOUGHT THROUGH THE CONSEQUENCES
OF WHAT HE WOULD HAVE TO DO TO ASSUME THE ROLE OF THE NATIONAL
SECURITY ADVISER. I THINK THERE WERE QUESTIONS AS
TO WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS PREPARED.
THERE MAY BE A QUESTION NOW AS TO WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS, YOU
KNOW, PREPARING PROPERLY WITH ALL OF HIS PAPERWORK AND
CERTAINLY THINKING THROUGH THE DUE DILIGENCE THAT'S REQUIRED TO
ASSUME THIS KIND OF A ROLE AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF THE U.S.
GOVERNMENT. >> JUAN, THIS IS SOMETHING I
HEARD FROM GENERAL HAYDEN AS WELL ABOUT WHETHER HE WAS
PROPERLY SUITED, WHETHER HE HAD THE PROPER PROFILE IN TERMS OF
EXPERIENCE AND TEMPERAMENT. BUT I THINK THIS GOES DEEPER
THAN JUST NOT FILLING OUT FORMS PROPERLY AND NOT BEING PREPARED.
DO YOU THINK HE LIED ON THESE FORMS?
>> I HAVE NO IDEA, NICOLE. IT'S HARD TO TELL.
AGAIN, I THINK JEREMY IS RIGHT THAT THERE'S A NUMBER OF
INSTANCES WHERE HE'S AVOIDED PROVIDING COMPLETE INFORMATION
BOTH INSIDE THE WHITE HOUSE AS WELL AS APPARENTLY ON THESE
FORMS. IT LOOKS SUSPICIOUS.
AND THE PROBLEM HERE, OF COURSE, IS PERCEPTION BECOMES REALITY.
PERCEPTION OF WHETHER HE WAS EVADING, PERCEPTION OF WHETHER
THERE WAS POTENTIAL COLLUSION, PERCEPTION OF WHETHER OR NOT HE
WAS PROMISING THINGS TO THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT BEFORE HE HAD
AUTHORITY TO DO SO. ALL OF THIS IS PROBLEMATIC
REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS ACTUALLY INTENTIONALLY
EVADING OR LYING. I CAN'T PEER INTO HIS SOUL AND
THAT'S CERTAINLY WHAT INVESTIGATES MAY BE LOOKING AT.
THE PERCEPTION IS DAMNING AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HAVING THE
CONVERSATION. >> JEREMY, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU
TO DO SOME SOUL PEERING IN A MOMENT.
LISTEN TO SEAN SPICER'S RESPONSE WHEN HE WAS ASKED ABOUT THE
MONEY FLYNN GOT FROM RUSSIAN TV TODAY.
>> DOES THE WHITE HOUSE CONSIDER MIKE FLYNN'S PAYMENT FROM RUSSIA
TODAY TO BE A PAYMENT FROM A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT?
>> I DON'T KNOW. ALL OF THAT OCCURRED PRIOR TO
HIS SERVICE. >> DOES THIS WHITE HOUSE
CONSIDER A PAYMENT FROM RUSSIA TODAY TO BE A PAYMENT FROM A
FOREIGN GOVERNMENT? >> WHAT I'M SAYING IS EVERYTHING
HE DID WAS PRIOR TO COMING TO THIS WHITE HOUSE.
>> RIGHT. >> FOR US TO DETERMINE SOMEONE
ELSE -- >> DO YOU CONSIDER THAT TO BE A
PAYMENT FROM A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT?
>> I'M SORRY, WHAT? >> IF SOMEONE TOOK MONEY FROM
RUSSIA TODAY -- >> IF THEY WERE AN EMPLOYEE OF
THE WHITE HOUSE, ABSOLUTELY. >> JEREMY, DO WE HAVE A PROBLEM
HERE? >> YEAH.
I MEAN RUSSIA TODAY IS BASICALLY THE STATE PROPAGANDA ARM OF THE
RUSSIAN FEDERATION. AND THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY
ON JANUARY 5th WHEN THEY ISSUED HAIR ASSESSMENT THAT R RUSSIA
MEDDLED IN THE ELECTION AND FAVORED DONALD TRUMP, THEY CITED
RUSSIA AS THE TIP OF THE SPEAR OF THE ATTACK IN THE DEMOCRACY.
IS THERE'S NO GETTING AROUND THIS.
THIS WAS COLLUSION BETWEEN THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT AND AT LEAST
ONE MEMBER OF THE TRUMP INNER CIRCLE TO GET PAID FOR THIS
ACTION AND THEN OF COURSE THE ACTION AND THE PAYMENT WASN'T
DISCLOSED. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
INVESTIGATORS WILL HAVE TO FOLLOW UP WITH.
>> WHAT'S YOUR SENSE OF HOW THIS TEAM IS DOING IN TERMS OF
GETTING ANYWHERE CLOSE TO A PLACE THAT'S ANYWHERE CLOSE TO A
PLACE THAT ALLOWS THEM TO TURN THE CORNER ON THE RUSSIAN STORY?
>> NOW YOU HAVE FLYNN OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE SO ONE COULD ASK WHY
NOT TURN OVER WHATEVER PAPERWORK YOU HAVE.
YOU'VE CUT TIES WITH THIS PERSON.
WHY NOT SAY HERE YOU GO, HE'S NOT WORKING FOR US ANYWHERE,
HAVE AT IT. WITH THE PRESIDENT DOING WHAT
HE'S DOING, WITH SEAN SPICER DOING WHAT HE'S DOING, HE'S
LEADING TO THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'RE HAVING.
NO ONE HAD THE PRESIDENT'S EAR ON FOREIGN POLICY THROUGHOUT THE
CAMPAIGN AND THE EARLY PART OF THIS ADMINISTRATION THAN MICHAEL
FLYNN HIMSELF. AT THE VERY LEAST THERE WAS A
CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH AREAS OF TURKEY AND RUSSIA WITH THE
PAYMENTS. DID THE ADMINISTRATION, DID THE
PRESIDENT KNOW -- WE ALSO KNOW THAT MICHAEL FLYNN OUT OF ALL OF
THE OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE PART OF THE ADMINISTRATION SHOULD HAVE
KNOWN BETTER. THIS IS HIS SECOND
ADMINISTRATION. THE SECOND ONE HE'S BEEN FIRED
FROM AS WELL. >> CHARLIE, LET ME ASK YOU
DIRECTLY. MIKE.
FLYNN WAS SOMEONE WHO MADE DEMOCRATS ANXIOUS FOR A WHOLE
LOT OF REASONS, HIS TEMPERAMENT, POLICY INSTINCTS, WHAT NOT, BUT
HE ALSO MADE REPUBLICANS UNCOMFORTABLE FOR THE QUESTIONS
THAT EMERGED VERY EARLY ON ABOUT POSSIBLE ETHICS.
WHAT'S YOUR SENSE OF THE PARTY'S TOLERANCE FOR THIS STORY
DRAGGING ON AND ON. >> IT IS GOING TO DRAG ON AN ON.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF INNOCENT EXPLANATIONS FOR THIS, NONE OF
WHICH IS PLAUSIBLE. AND THE WHITE HOUSE'S REFUSING
TO BE TRANSPARENT IS COMPOUNDING THE PROBLEM.
WHEN HE WAS FIRED, THE STORY NEVER ADDED UP IN THE FIRST
PLACE, THE FACT SHE WAS HAVING A CONVERSATION THAT DONALD TRUMP
SAYS I WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH HIM HAVING THAT
CONVERSATION AND YET HE LIED. AGAIN WHY WOULD YOU LIE ABOUT
SOMETHING THAT DIDN'T -- SO THE QUESTION IS WHAT DID THE WHITE
HOUSE KNOW THAT GENERAL FLYNN WAS UP TO AND WHEN DID THEY KNOW
IT. THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT THE
STORY AS IT KEEPS UNRAVELING THAT RAISES MORE AND MORE
QUESTIONS. SO AGAIN, YOU GO BACK TO THIS
TRANSITION WHICH WAS A CHALLENGED TRANSITION.
THIS WAS PROBABLY ONE OF THE WORST SELECTIONS AND I THINK IT
REFLECTS VERY VERY POORLY ON DONALD TRUMP'S JUDGMENT AND OF
THE JUDGMENT OF THE ADMINISTRATION.
>> AND YOU SEE SEAN SPICER NOW TRYING TO DISTANCE MICHAEL FLYNN
FROM THE ADMINISTRATION. NO, HE WAS THE GUY.
HE WAS THE FOREIGN POLICY GUY. HIS NAME WAS FLOATED AS A
For more infomation >> Щенячий патруль новые серии Рокки и Ромео Развивающие мультики про машинки игрушки Герои в масках - Duration: 6:40. 
For more infomation >> ملخص ماقدمه ليونيل ميسي ضد ريال مدريد | Lionel Messi vs Real Madrid 2017 - Duration: 3:07. 
For more infomation >> RED BALL 4 RED BALL VS. EVIL NINTENDO BOSSES #11 - GAME MOVIE VIDEO FOR KIDS - Duration: 5:40. 
For more infomation >> PicsArt | Hướng dẫn Việt hóa Font chữ cho PicsArt - Duration: 7:52. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét