Sunday, August 19, 2018

Trump news on Youtube Aug 19 2018

 President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump's every move together is the subject of ample speculation — and in a new piece by The New York Times, a source alleges that she appears more comfortable solo

 "In private, a former White House official said, Mr. and Mrs. Trump give the impression that they like one another, but their rapport is not particularly warm," the Times report, published Friday, states

"One person who has spent a considerable amount of time around her said Mrs. Trump was far more relaxed outside the presence of her husband than when he was around

"  Stephanie Grisham, Mrs. Trump's communications director, did not immediately respond to PEOPLE's requests for comment about the story, but she told the Times in part that Mrs

Trump, 48, "is staying true to the independent woman that she is by doing things her own way," adding, "This should be celebrated, not criticized

Her priorities remain her family, her personal health and her role as first lady

"  One of the former model's most controversial moments to date came when she wore a Zara jacket emblazoned with the words "I REALLY DON'T CARE, DO U?" on her way to visit separated children at an immigration facility in Texas in June

The Times reports that "a person close to Mrs. Trump said the jacket was actually directed at anyone — both outside and inside the White House — who wanted to criticize her decision to visit the children in light of the administration's aggressive immigration policies

"  At the time of the uproar, Mr. Trump, 72, tweeted that his wife's clothing choice was directed at the "Fake News Media," but Grisham said via a statement, "It's a jacket

There was no hidden message. After today's important visit to Texas, I hope the media isn't going to choose to focus on her wardrobe (Much like her high heels last year)

"  Behind closed doors, "Mrs. Trump maintains a separate bedroom from her husband, and when the two travel, they stay in separate hotel suites," states the new Times report, written by Katie Rogers, Julie Hirschfeld Davis, and Maggie Haberman

 Most of Mrs. Trump's time in the White House appears to be spent in the residence, where the Times reports she "has worked with the kitchen staff to arrange more-healthful meals for her husband — though he still prefers two scoops of ice cream for dessert

"  Mr. Trump's proclivity for high-calorie food made more headlines in May, when a CNN report said the president was quietly making small changes to his diet and acknowledging in private that he needed to lose weight

 The president had a complete physical in January, after which former White House physician Dr

Ronny Jackson — who faced shocking allegations of misconduct in April after Mr. Trump nominated him for Veterans Affairs secretary — said Mr

Trump was "currently very healthy," but "would benefit from a diet that is lower in fat and carbohydrates, and from a routine exercise regimen

" The physician also said Mr. Trump's cholesterol was slightly elevated, but he was prescribed Crestor to address that, and otherwise "his cardiac health is excellent

"  As for Mrs. trump's daily routine, she "does regular Pilates workouts and consults with the White House Historical Association on residence renovations and upkeep," in addition to her work in the East Wing on Be Best — her "awareness campaign" about the challenges America's children face — according to the Times

 Though Mrs. Trump is described by aides in the story as "warm, engaging and witty," the Times notes that very little is known about Mrs

Trump's life, as she surrounds herself with a tight-knit circle including her older sister, Ines Knauss, and parents, Viktor and Amalija Knavs, who became naturalized U

S. citizens in August by using the same chain migration program that Mr. Trump has been pushing to end

 "Her aides regularly deny a widespread belief that Mrs. Trump lives outside the White House with her parents, near Barron's school in Maryland," the story states

 According to the Times, a White House official said that her parents stay at a Trump Tower apartment in New York, Mr

Trump's Mar-a-Lago in Florida, and a White House suite that was once the bedroom of former First Lady Michelle Obama's mother, Marian Shields Robinson

 Read the Times story here.

For more infomation >> Melania Trump Is 'Far More Relaxed' When She's Not with the President: Report - News Today - Duration: 6:19.

-------------------------------------------

Auprès des enfants malades, Melania Trump attendrit toute l'Amérique - Duration: 3:20.

For more infomation >> Auprès des enfants malades, Melania Trump attendrit toute l'Amérique - Duration: 3:20.

-------------------------------------------

Trump: novo porta-aviões fará os 'inimigos dos EUA tremerem de medo' - Duration: 1:43.

For more infomation >> Trump: novo porta-aviões fará os 'inimigos dos EUA tremerem de medo' - Duration: 1:43.

-------------------------------------------

Trump's Lawyer Unleashed One Surprise Attack That Left Mueller Reeling - Duration: 11:46.

Trump's Lawyer Unleashed One Surprise Attack That Left Mueller Reeling

Robert Mueller's rigged witch hunt against President Trump is reaching a critical phase.

Donald Trump and his legal team are preparing for battle with the special counsel.

In an interview with Sean Hannity, Trump's lawyer revealed a surprised that left Mueller

reeling.

There have been news reports flying around about the status of President Trump sitting

for an interview with special counsel Robert Mueller.

Trump is said to favor the idea, but his lawyers believe Mueller is nothing more than a snake

trying to set a perjury trap.

Rudy Giuliani discussed these developments in an interview on Sean Hannity's Fox News

Channel show.

Giuliani went further than usual and revealed that the investigation was going to blow up

in Mueller's face because it was illegitimate:

"Yes, I've never been involved in an investigation on either side that's more illegitimate

than this one, that is so obviously more illegitimate.

And I wonder where is the sense of justice on the part of Mueller, on the part of the

Justice Department.

After all, the Justice Department — this is a Justice Department investigation.

He is working for Rosenstein.

And at some point, you've got to say the irregularities, the unethical conduct…"

"…the double standard, the way in which people who hate Trump will put into primary

positions of power has completely tainted this investigation," Giuliani declared.

Giuliani stated that Mueller needed to wrap the investigation up by September or he would

be in violation of Justice Department guidelines about taking action within 60 days of an election.

The President's lawyer also dropped an ominous warning that there were bombshell developments

yet to come about how the FBI started and conducted the Russia investigation.

Giuliani stated, "The reality is, the real story is not that this case isn't going

to fizzle.

It's going to blow up on them.

The real question is, what we talked about before, there's a lot more to what they

did that nobody knows about yet."

And he concluded by stating that the real investigation should be focused on the FBI

leadership, like James Comey who launched this partisan witch hunt.

"I said a long time ago, the investigation here has to be of the investigators, because

we can't let this happen again in American history.

We may not have a president as strong as President Trump.

A lesser president could have really been cracked by this," the President's lawyer

declared.

Finally, Giuliani also explained why an interview with the President would be a waste of time.

Giuliani stated that Mueller already had all the answers and there was nothing President

Trump could add to the record.

Mueller is not a prosecutor acting in good faith.

Trump supporters believe he is an active part of a silent coup against the President.

He was not tasked with a crime to investigate, so Mueller will investigate until he finds

a "crime."

It's the very definition of a witch hunt and most Trump supporters agree the President

should not sit for an interview with a bad faith actor like Mueller.

We will keep you up to date on any breaking developments in Robert Mueller's rigged

witch hunt against President Trump.

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers' newsfeeds and

is instead promoting mainstream media sources.

When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content.

Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with

your friends

and family.

Thank you.

For more infomation >> Trump's Lawyer Unleashed One Surprise Attack That Left Mueller Reeling - Duration: 11:46.

-------------------------------------------

Police search for man who threatened President Trump, local District Attorney - Duration: 0:21.

For more infomation >> Police search for man who threatened President Trump, local District Attorney - Duration: 0:21.

-------------------------------------------

Federal Judge Drops Crushing Anvil On Mueller Investigation, Delivers Trump Victory - Duration: 5:35.

For more infomation >> Federal Judge Drops Crushing Anvil On Mueller Investigation, Delivers Trump Victory - Duration: 5:35.

-------------------------------------------

Trump Just Revealed The Trap John Brennan Caught Himself In And It's Glorious - Duration: 7:22.

For more infomation >> Trump Just Revealed The Trap John Brennan Caught Himself In And It's Glorious - Duration: 7:22.

-------------------------------------------

This Lie Just Destroyed Robert Mueller's Case To Impeach Trump - Duration: 12:30.

This Lie Just Destroyed Robert Mueller's Case To Impeach Trump

Robert Mueller's witch hunt against Donald Trump has one goal.

Frame the President for the crime of collusion with Russia so Congress can impeach him.

But this lie just destroyed Robert Mueller's case to impeach the President.

Robert Mueller Sets His Sights on a Trump Associate

Robert Mueller is out to get longtime Trump associate Roger Stone.

Stone made several statements during the 2016 campaign that indicated he communicated with

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

Mueller latched onto these statements to dig into Stone's life and terrorized 10 of his

associates with grand jury appearances.

Mueller has failed to produce evidence that any Trump associate colluded with the Russians.

Roger Stone is his last shot to justify his witch hunt.

So Mueller turned his attack dog investigators on him.

What the Evidence Actually Shows Mueller is focusing on statements made by

Stone in August of 2016.

Stone claimed that Julian Assange told him WikiLeaks would be releasing damaging information

about the Clinton Foundation in October 2016.

That month he also wrote a tweet claiming it would soon be "the Podestas time in the

barrel."

Mueller and anti-Trump journalists took these statements to mean Stone had advanced knowledge

of WikiLeaks obtaining hacked emails from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.

Collusion conspiracy theorists hang their hat on these statements.

But what is the truth?

The truth is Julian Assange has publicly stated that Roger Stone never said or predicted anything

that WikiLeaks hadn't already said publicly.

"Roger Stone has never said or tweeted anything we at Wikileaks had not already said publicly,"

Assange declared.

WikiLeaks and Roger Stone also exchanged twitter direct messages in 2016.

In those messages, WikiLeaks insisted that Stone stop falsely claiming to have a relationship

with the group.

Stone associate Sam Nunberg also told the press that Stone had never spoken to Julian

Assange.

"Roger didn't communicate with Assange.

If he had communicated with Assange, then I would be concerned that he would go to jail,

but he didn't," Nunberg declared.

Stone also stated that his comment about the "Podestas time in the barrel" was referring

to the Podesta brothers, since his tweet used "Podestas" as plural.

He claimed his tweet referenced the fact that the Podesta brothers business practices would

soon come under scrutiny.

And Stone was on to something.

Mueller referred Podesta for a criminal referral for his work as a foreign lobbyist.

More FISA Abuses Stone published an op-ed in the Daily Caller

where he claimed an FBI whistleblower informed him he had been under FISA surveillance since

2016:

"A whistleblower has told my lawyers where my name and the fact that application had

been made for a FISA warrant on me was redacted from the stunning Carter Page FISA warrant

application released by the FBI last week with 300 of 400 pages blacked out.

A FISA warrant can only be issued against a U.S. Citizen who is engaged in espionage

for a foreign power against the United States.

I have never engaged in any such thing."

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper appeared on Erin Burnett's CNN program

and did not shoot down that claim.

Burnett tweeted:

Roger Stone tells me whistleblower told his attys that Page FISA confirms there was a

FISA app. on Stone.

Frmr NSA Clapper responds: l do not have any direct knowledge (of it)…BUT it seems logical

that the FBI would consider seeking authorization for FISA surveillance of Stone"

If Stone really was under FISA surveillance, this shows that the FBI abused its power and

was out to get Trump.

Stone was not a Russian agent.

And he never colluded with WikiLeaks.

But Mueller needs to frame Stone for collusion so he can try and squeeze him to turn on the

President.

This is Mueller's last chance to come up with dirt on the President.

But it's turning into another dead end.

We will keep you up to date on any developments in this story.

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers' newsfeeds and

is instead promoting mainstream media sources.

When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content.

Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with

your friends

and family.

Thank you.

For more infomation >> This Lie Just Destroyed Robert Mueller's Case To Impeach Trump - Duration: 12:30.

-------------------------------------------

White House Officials Say Trump's Abuses Of Power Are Just Getting Started - Duration: 4:09.

According to a new report in the Washington Post this week, Donald Trump is not happy

with only revoking John Brennan's security clearance, even though the guy deserved to

have his security clearance revoked, he wants to go after more people.

It's not enough.

There's still more critics of him out there, and he has got to take them down.

Now, before I get into that, let me reiterate something I said the other day, and that is

that John Brennan is a horrible human being who deserves no sympathy whatsoever for having

his security clearance revoked.

He's a man that should have been thrown in prison a decade ago, yet was allowed to walk

free after being the architect of the Bush administration's torture policies.

I have no sympathy for him getting his security clearance revoked.

What does drive me insane is why it was done.

Trump did it not because he realized that Brennan was a horrible person.

He did it because he viewed Brennan was a threat.

Now, according to this report by the Washington Post, two senior administration officials

spoke to them and said that, yes, Trump wants to do this to more people.

He wants to go after even more enemies, even more critics, and make damn sure that everybody

understands that if you go after the president, he's going to go after you, too.

Now, according to this report in the Washington Post, these aides and other people in the

White House have told him, "This is probably a bad idea.

It seems like something that's easily going to backfire on you."

But he doesn't care.

They said specifically if Trump wants to do it, he'll just do it.

There is no reasoning with him.

There is no talking rational ideas with him.

He is an angry, feeble, old man that is not used to being told no.

At this point in his life, it's too old to teach this old dog new tricks, so he's going

to do whatever it is he wants to do.

But as Jake Tapper actually pointed out earlier this week on CNN, what he's doing is inadvertently

connecting the dots for Robert Mueller.

These people he's going after, it's not just because they say bad things about him or because

they don't support him.

It's because he's afraid of what they know and what they could possibly tell investigators.

But by picking them off one by one, stripping them of security clearances or firing them,

he's really laying out a roadmap that Robert Mueller could easily follow to know who to

interview next and get information from.

So, yeah, this whole thing, whether it's through the Mueller investigation or just through

the massive public backlash that's happening, is going to backfire on Donald Trump.

Eventually, he's going to fire somebody that doesn't ... Or, excuse me, revoke the security

clearance of someone who doesn't have a horrid history like John Brennan does.

He's going to fire or revoke a security clearance for a truly sympathetic character.

He always takes things a little too far, and that is exactly what these aides are worried

about.

The Brennan thing is easy to brush off because Brennan's a horrible person.

But not all these people are.

Eventually, he's going to pick on the wrong person, the public's going to turn on him,

Mueller's going to get even more evidence, and everything will come crashing down for

Donald Trump.

At least that's what these aides happen to believe.

And I think a lot of the public happens to believe that as well.

Trump is out of control.

This is a disgusting abuse of power that he is engaging in right now.

I have to imagine that a lot of people in the Republican party are freaking out about

this right now because the last thing they want before the midterms is for Trump to do

anything stupid that would even come across as remotely being an abuse of power.

Yet here he is right now, abusing every single power of the Office of the Presidency, just

a few months before those midterms.

That's not going to end well for anyone with an R next to their name on the ballot this

year.

For more infomation >> White House Officials Say Trump's Abuses Of Power Are Just Getting Started - Duration: 4:09.

-------------------------------------------

Trump's Critics Lose Their Security Clearance & A TSA Agent Busts a Move | The Daily Show - Duration: 3:36.

This has been another rough week for the Trump White House.

Scandals, bad press, bad poll numbers,

but the good news is they found someone to blame.

White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders

dropping a bombshell in today's White House briefing.

She walked in and read a statement from President Trump

announcing that the White House

is revoking the security clearance

of former CIA director John Brennan.

Mr. Brennan has recently leveraged his status

to make a series of unfounded and outrageous allegations,

wild outbursts on the Internet and television.

Mr. Brennan's lying and recent conduct,

characterized by increasingly frenzied commentary,

is wholly inconsistent with access

to the nation's most closely held secrets.

Unfounded allegations,

wild Internet outbursts and lying?

Sounds like Sarah Sanders is just reading

from President Trump's daily schedule.

Just... That's what it sounds like to me.

It's like, "Mr. President, we need to wrap this up.

You'll be late for your 12:30 outburst, come on."

And look, I don't really understand why former officials

need to keep their security clearance forever.

I mean, as far as I know, Nick Fury isn't showing up

at John Brennan's apartment unannounced

to bring him back for one last job.

But something tells me

that Trump isn't just protecting secrets

for the good of the country.

As part of this review, I'm evaluating action

with respect to the following individuals:

James Clapper, James Comey, Michael Hayden,

Sally Yates, Susan Rice, Andrew McCabe,

Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Bruce Ohr.

Okay, that's just Trump's enemies list.

It really is. He's trying to hide it as something else.

"I'm canceling security clearance

"for James Comey, Peter Strzok, Rosie O'Donnell,

"fake news Don Lemon, antifa

"and the girl at McDonald's who gave me barbecue sauce

"instead of honey mustard.

"I thought my tongue was having a stroke, folks.

Very scary."

Now, there is some other big news today

that we have to talk about.

A Pennsylvania grand jury has reported

that the Catholic Church there protected more than 300 priests

who were accused of abusing children

over seven decades.

Yeah. And that's just in Pennsylvania. Right?

(coughs) Just in Pennsylvania.

Like, we're not even counting

the rest of America and Europe and Africa.

And I'm sorry, guys, at some point,

I feel like we need to stop calling it a church

and start calling it what it is:

a molesting club with an opening prayer,

'cause that's what it feels like.

This is becoming so widespread,

at this point, confession is just going to be

a two-way conversation between priests.

It's gonna be like, "Forgive me, Father, for have I sinned."

"Forgive me, Father, for I have sinned."

This shit never ends.

Anyway, let's move on. In other news,

it looks like the TSA is upping their game

from busting rule breakers to busting moves.

Something fun on a security line at an airport,

if you can believe that.

Let's take a look at this.

A boy tosses away his stuffed animal,

daring a TSA officer to a dance-off

while the family was going through security

at Newark Airport.

Aw! This is so cute!

I mean, 30 people missed their flights, but aw...!

"How could you miss Grandpa's funeral?"

"I know. I'm sorry. But you should've seen the kid.

He was doing the thing. And, oh, man."

And can we all just agree that this kid is probably just

a cover for his parents to sneak cocaine through security?

It was like, "Okay, Billy, go do the dancing. Go do it.

Two more kilos. Two more kilos. Let's move!"

For more infomation >> Trump's Critics Lose Their Security Clearance & A TSA Agent Busts a Move | The Daily Show - Duration: 3:36.

-------------------------------------------

Federal Judge Drops Crushing Anvil On Mueller Investigation, Delivers Trump Victory - Duration: 4:58.

Federal Judge Drops Crushing Anvil On Mueller Investigation, Delivers Trump Victory

The jury is currently locked in deliberations in the trial of former Trump campaign executive,

69-year-old Paul Manafort as mainstream media outlets The Washington Post, New York Times,

AP, CNN, NBC, Politico, and Buzzfeed all requested the Court release the names and addresses

of jurors.

Manafort is accused of earning more than $60 million as a political consultant in Ukraine,

and that he "failed to report a significant percentage of" on his tax returns, therefore

defrauding the IRS.

Manafort was targeted as part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team of investigators looking

into the supposed collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

U.S. Senior District Judge T.S. Ellis appointed by Republican President Ronald Reagan and

is among a small, select handful of judges in America that know just how deep down the

rabbit hole the deepest secrets of the Russia investigation go.

He denied the motion from media organizations to make public the names of the jurors in

the trial, saying he personally has faced "criticism and threats" and does not want

the same for jurors.

Ellis cited the "peace and safety" of the jurors and "the integrity of the process"

in denying the motion, then revealed to the packed courtroom that he is now under 24/7

protection from the U.S. Marshals as a result of the threats he is currently facing stemming

from this trial.

"I have the Marshals' protection.

I don't even go to the hotel alone.

I've received criticism and threats," Ellis said, "I'd imagine jurors would,

too."

Ellis added – "I had no idea this case excited this emotion.

I had no idea how this case would be perceived by the public and the press."

When Manafort's team of attorneys asked him, unsuccessfully, to dismiss a slew of

charges against their client accusing him of tax evasion and bank fraud, Ellis demanded

Mueller's office hand over, without any redactions, an otherwise highly classified

memorandum containing the scope of his authority to investigate Donald Trump's former campaign

chairman and other crimes.

Ellis noted his concern of the "unfettered power" seemingly possessed by Mueller in

probing ties between President Donald Trump's campaign and Russia.

Judge Ellis is having none of it, as Reuters reports –

A federal judge said Special Counsel Robert Mueller should not have "unfettered power"

in probing ties between President Donald Trump's campaign and Russia, and accused Mueller of

using criminal cases to pressure Trump's allies to turn against him.

At a tense hearing in a federal court in Virginia on Friday, U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis

III sharply questioned whether Mueller exceeded his authority in filing tax and bank fraud

charges against Trump's former campaign manager, Paul Manafort.

Ellis said the indictment appeared to be a way for Mueller to leverage Manafort into

providing information about Trump.

"The vernacular is to sing," he said.

"You don't really care about Mr. Manafort," the judge said.

"You really care about what information Mr. Manafort can give you to lead to Mr. Trump"

and his eventual prosecution or impeachment.

"It's unlikely you're going to persuade me the special counsel has unfettered power

to do whatever he wants," Ellis, who was appointed by Republican President Ronald Reagan,

said at a hearing on Manafort's motion to dismiss the Virginia charges."

Like most motions to dismiss, Manafort's was initially viewed as a long-shot bid to

win his freedom and get out from under Mueller's thumb.

Charged with an obscure law in place since the 1930s under the Foreign Agents Registration

Act, Manafort is quite literally being tried for criminal charges under an obscure law

that has been used only six times before, for a crime of which surely more than half

of Washington is currently guilty.

Normally such a violation in nearly all cases is treated as a regulatory violation and punished

with fines at best.

Of note, Democratic darling and lobbyist, Tony Podesta, brother of Hillary Clinton's

campaign manager John Podesta, was guilty of the same crime, yet not one single federal

prosecutor saw fit to bring charges against him, and Mueller himself offered him immunity,

while continuing the trial against Manafort for the exact same "crimes."

Yes, there are issues of tax evasion, allegedly hiding income, and depositing money in offshore

banks, but not one single bit of those "crimes" relates to anything remotely involving alleged

Russian collusion to elect Donald Trump president during the election of 2016.

According to Judge Andrew Napolitano, "The criminal charges themselves clearly don't

match up to the original purpose of the investigation.

Both were accused of working as foreign agents and failing to report that status to the federal

government, using shell corporations to launder income and obstruction of justice by lying

to the federal government.

The alleged crimes of Manafort and Gates appear to have nothing to do with Trump, nor have

they any facial relationship to the Russians.

So why were these two indicted by a grand jury hearing evidence about alleged American

assistance to Russian interference with the 2016 presidential campaign?"

For more infomation >> Federal Judge Drops Crushing Anvil On Mueller Investigation, Delivers Trump Victory - Duration: 4:58.

-------------------------------------------

John Brennan Threatens Lawsuit To Prevent Trump Revoking More Security Clearances - Duration: 0:45.

granting of the revoking of

security clearances so you trust

people with those secrets.

>> I'm curious.

On Friday night with Rachel

Maddow you indicated that you

have had lawyers contact you

about possible legal action.

It's 48 hours later.

What would that look like?

Is that something you're serious

about?

>> Well, I have been contacted

by a number of lawyers and they

have already given me their

thoughts about the basis for a

complaint, an injunction to try

to prevent him from doing this

in the future.

If my clearances and my

reputation as I'm being pulled

through the mud now, it if

that's the price to prevent

Donald Trump from doing this to

other people, to me it's a small

price to pay.

I am going to do whatever I can

For more infomation >> John Brennan Threatens Lawsuit To Prevent Trump Revoking More Security Clearances - Duration: 0:45.

-------------------------------------------

Man Says Baby Looks Like Donald Trump's (Full Episode) | Paternity Court - Duration: 16:44.

Hello, Your Honor.

Hello.

This is the case ofThomas v. McKey.

Thank you, Jerome. Good day, everyone.

AUDIENCE: Good day!

Ms. Thomas, you and the defendant, Mr. McKey,

met on an online dating website,

and the conversation quickly jumped offline and into Mr. McKey's bed.

You believed you were in a committed relationship

with the defendant,

and was devastated when he denied your pregnancy, is that correct?

Yes, Your Honor.

Mr. McKey, you say that there is no way

you could be the biological father of the plaintiff's son, Karson.

You claim once you took a look at Ms. Thomas's son,

you were 100% sure that her baby belonged to another man, is that correct?

Yes, Your Honor.

All right, so I'm going to start with you, Ms. Thomas.

Why do you believe you were in a committed relationship

with the defendant?

First of all, we met on a dating website, as you spoke.

We started off talking.

And then once we started knowing each other, who we were...

JUDGE LAKE: How long did you talk on the phone?

Maybe about a month or two.

Okay.

And then I started going to see him,

maybe like about a 45 minutes' drive

from where I live,

like every other day.

So I'm assuming... I'm spending the night, staying the night with him,

things like that. So I'm assuming...

And you're having a good time, getting to know one another.

You are obviously, since you're spending the night,

already started having sex.

That's right.

And so what did you like about him?

What were you drawn to? He was kind, he was...

His looks. He's not a bad looking person.

(SCATTERED LAUGHTER)

He's funny. He's hilarious. He keeps a smile on my face.

JUDGE LAKE: So he's funny, he's good-looking,

you thought you had met a nice guy.

Right.

Did it turn into a relationship at some point?

Well, I thought maybe it was gonna head that way.

But, evidently, he wasn't looking for what I was looking for.

Mmm-hmm. So, Mr. McKey.

You're having sex, having this relationship going,

but you weren't feeling like making a commitment.

I wasn't really, Your Honor.

JUDGE LAKE: Okay.

Say something else besides that.

No, really, Mr. McKey. Tell me about it, though.

A lot of times we are in situations like this,

where there are two people on two different pages.

And I hear a lot of times when women say,

"You know, I was committed to him,"

and then the man will say,

"Well, I wasn't committed to her."

Or even vice versa.

Sometimes, you know, the man is committed and faithful, and the woman...

Did you know Ms. Thomas wanted to be in a relationship with you?

Not really, Your Honor, but...

Did you all ever discuss being in a relationship?

No, ma'am.

Oh, you didn't?

No, ma'am.

So what was it about her you were attracted to?

That picture she had online.

JUDGE LAKE: Okay, so you liked what you saw...

MCKEY: Yes, ma'am.

...and so as you were dating,

you just didn't feel like you were,

at that point, ready to have a commitment?

Yes, ma'am.

How long had you been driving 45 minutes to see him, Ms. Thomas?

Oh, about a month or so, or longer.

So about a month, you would drive to go see him?

Like every other day, I would drive like...

At nighttime, I would put my kids to bed, I'd go see him

until it was time for them to go to school.

I would wake up and be back home before my kids were awake.

So, I have an older child, she would be home with them, but...

I didn't do it every day. I did it like every other day.

And so, after this month, Mr. McKey,

you're in this casual relationship,

she's driving to come see you.

You don't feel like you're ready to make a commitment.

At some point, you find out you're pregnant.

And when you find out,

you call Mr. McKey and tell him?

THOMAS: Yes, ma'am.

He thought I was just joking, like playing around, maybe just sick.

So, maybe like, a couple of weeks later,

I said, "Let me take a pregnancy test."

So I took a pregnancy test, I took a picture of it,

and I sent it to him through text message.

He was like, "What is this?"

I was like, "A pregnancy test."

He said, "I don't know how to read these.

"So tell me what that means."

I said, "I'm pregnant."

He was like, "Oh, okay, so, whatever you decide to do, just let me know."

I believe that's all he said.

So, Mr. McKey,

when you found out she was pregnant,

what were you thinking, sir?

Well, she called me when she was like,

three months pregnant,

I got a phone call and I was at work,

and I told her I'd call her back.

But I ended up blocking her number.

What?

He blocked it after we had that conversation.

Really?

MCKEY: After I blocked her number,

she had the baby, and called me from another number.

So, she called to tell you she was pregnant,

and you just said, "Okay," and then blocked her number?

Yes, ma'am, Your Honor.

Oh, you're cold-blooded.

So you blocked her number?

And never heard from her again

because the number was blocked?

Yes, Your Honor.

And you didn't call him back again, Ms. Thomas?

I tried to keep calling. I thought maybe the phone was off,

or maybe he had, you know, low service, or you know, it just turns off.

So I kept trying, kept trying.

I still didn't get nothing.

I so happened to change my phone number.

So he didn't know my new number.

Oh!

THOMAS: Yeah.

So after I had my baby...

So, hold on, Mr. McKey,

you never heard from Ms. Thomas again

during the whole pregnancy?

I haven't heard from her, Your Honor.

All while she was pregnant?

Not while she was pregnant.

So you weren't there when the baby was born?

No, Your Honor.

So after the baby was born,

you tried back again with this new number?

I tried back again, like a week later, with the new number.

Then he answered.

And I told him I just had my baby.

He still couldn't believe me.

He was like, "Send me some pictures."

He was at work then. He was like, "Send me some pictures."

So I sent him some pictures.

And he was like,

"That's my baby? Are you sure that's my baby?"

I mean, he looked at the color of it, why he is the color he is.

JUDGE LAKE: So, wait a minute, Mr. McKey,

when you got the pictures, what were you thinking?

Like, "This is not my baby," Your Honor.

I'm like, "Damn, this baby makes number eight,

"right here."

Number eight for who? You or her?

MCKEY: For her.

THOMAS: I have eight.

That'd be number eight.

JUDGE LAKE: Number eight?

So I'm kinda confused.

Whoa!

So did you know she had children when you were dating her?

THOMAS: Yeah, he knew I had kids.

I didn't know she had eight kids, you know.

He knew...

Seven. This little boy makes eight.

So, Mr. McKey, she sent you a text

with the picture of the baby.

Your first response was what?

The baby look like he could be from Donald Trump.

(LAUGHTER)

THOMAS: Like, really?

(GIGGLES)

Oh!

I didn't expect that one.

He thinks that the color make a difference.

The color doesn't make a difference.

I think what you're saying is

you thought the baby was biracial?

That's what you meant?

Aw, he's adorable.

So when you saw the baby, you said, "That's not mine."

MCKEY: Yes, Your Honor.

JUDGE LAKE: Not just because of the skin color,

but you felt that the features and even the characteristics of the baby

were of a child you believed to be biracial?

Yes, Your Honor.

JUDGE LAKE: Okay.

'Cause you know in this courtroom,

we don't play around judging kids by their skin color.

But I'm trying to understand when you say

it looked like it could be...

I understand what you're saying.

(LAUGHTER)

But at this point,

how are you feeling in your heart,

like, are you just so doubtful

you don't want to attach yourself...

If she was meeting me on a dating site,

whoever else do you think she might be meeting?

You feel like because she has more than one child,

that she, potentially, was entertaining, a lot of different men.

THOMAS: Right.

JUDGE LAKE: And so it's not just you she was sleeping with.

Is that what you're trying to say?

Why mine?

Oh, now I get what you're saying.

Could you just talk?

I'm trying to, uh...

I feel like I'm trying to, uh...

Right...

It's like reading Morse code, pulling teeth, and everything all at once,

trying to get a story out of you, Mr. McKey.

You're thinking maybe she was already pregnant,

is that what you're thinking?

Because it was only a one-month affair?

It was an affair of longer than a month.

It's just how fast it happened in a month.

Wait a minute, explain that.

MCKEY: I meet you April 1st,

and April 20th, we getting it in.

It didn't take long.

Oh, you're saying it's because

she had sex with you so quickly,

that you felt like, maybe, this was the type of person

or type of woman who's also having sex with other people?

Online dating...

When we first started off, we were using protection.

And he knew that, and he was like...

he wanted to... without it.

I was like, "No, you know, I'm fertile."

"I just had a baby a year or two ago.

"So you know I'm fertile, so I can't."

So this particular time, we didn't have anything, so...

I get it, you don't have to go any further.

No, no, but the point is this, though,

I will say this, Mr. McKey,

once a woman tells you she is fertile, you believe her.

THOMAS: Right.

No really, I mean, if she already has seven children,

that is a very fertile woman.

I almost had a heart attack when I found that out.

Whoa!

I hid this pregnancy the whole nine months.

You did?

From my whole family.

Because I didn't want to have another child without their dad.

So the entire nine months you went without the support...

When I went into labor, my family was like, "What?

"You're in the hospital having what?"

I said I'm in the hospital having my baby.

And you had no idea, Mr. McKey?

No, I didn't know she was having a baby, Your Honor.

But you look at that baby.

He looks just like you. Just a different color.

So she called you and told you she was pregnant,

and you blocked her number.

Now you see her in here crying,

'cause she had to go through this entire pregnancy by herself,

she couldn't get in touch with you,

and you just standing there, casual, like,

"It didn't mean anything to me."

If that's your biological child, then what?

You've missed the entire beginning of his life.

But what if he's not mine, Your Honor?

What if he is not?

I apologize if he is not. But I'm 100% sure...

So when is the first time you met Karson?

I mean, he was like, a week old.

So now, when you got there and you saw the baby, talk to me about how you felt.

THOMAS: The same way he's feeling now.

He questioned it, like,

"Are you sure. Is it mine? Why is his skin color..."

That's all he keeps saying.

But he adores him. I'm not gonna lie.

But he just questioned the skin color.

That's like when we went and took the blood test,

we stopped at a store, she went in the store first,

I grab the baby out of the car seat,

take him in the store,

sit down, I had a lady walk up, like,

"That's a cute baby, right there.

"His mama white?

"You know, I'm not racist or nothing, but his mama white?"

I'm like, "His mama right there."

So she says, "Is his daddy white?"

I'm like, "I'm the daddy."

"I'm supposed to be the daddy, but we just took a test.

"You know, I know."

She's like, "Baby, I pray for you."

That's what the lady said in the store?

MCKEY: She was ready to get mad, but you...

That's the thing. I have to do that every day.

Somebody's like, "Is his mama white, or is his daddy white?"

So you all can't even enjoy

these beautiful, precious moments,

these beginnings with the child,

because every time you're walking around

with this beautiful baby,

somebody looks at either one of you all,

and tries to discredit the fact

that you could be the child's parent?

Right. My family says he looks like him,

by the nose and everything else.

He snuffles when he sleeps, like him,

he grunts like him and everything else.

They look alike.

Mr. McKey, when you look at the baby,

in terms of the features,

do you feel like there's a resemblance?

My mama says he could be mine,

but my auntie says,

"She needs to find the dad of that baby."

Okay, so even in your own family,

the response has been...

Is off.

Is off.

Karson's eight months old.

So you've been doing this all this time?

Yes, ma'am.

Well, listen, this courtroom is about getting to the truth,

and I have to ask difficult questions,

I need to ask you were you with any other men

during the time Karson was conceived?

No, ma'am.

All right. So do you have any other kids, Mr. McKey?

I have a daughter.

You do? And so this would be your first son?

I have two more on the way.

You have two more kids on the way right now?

Yes ma'am, Your Honor.

With your spouse or your girlfriend?

Girlfriend.

Okay, so, the children were planned?

No. Okay.

THOMAS: Are you talking about me?

So you have twins on the way?

No, not twins, but two different women.

Are you talking about me?

I just asked were you having a baby with your girlfriend.

They're both your girlfriends?

Like two sisters.

WOMAN: What?

Wait a minute.

Did you just say you have two sisters pregnant

in the same family?

Yes, Your Honor.

Mr. McKey, you up here lying? Are you serious?

Yes, Your Honor.

Two sisters in the same family?

They're both having your baby at the same time?

Probably a month apart.

THOMAS: Wow.

Mr. McKey,

please tell me you're not going to end up

in this courtroom again...

(LAUGHTER)

I might be, Your Honor.

You might see me in the next 120 days.

It's not funny, but I'm literally like, oh...

'Cause you're serious.

Yes, ma'am.

You ain't said this much all day.

So the question of the day becomes

when are you gonna start wearing a condom?

You can't go on like this, Mr. McKey.

That's three paternity cases going on at one time.

These are babies. These are babies.

These are people.

These are little beautiful people

you're bringing in the world.

It's not a sport.

Just because I have eight, that don't mean I'm doing all that...

I've been married, I'm a widow.

So four of my kids are from my husband.

It's not like I'm out here just sleeping around.

Ms. Thomas, I want you to just take a moment

and explain to Mr. McKey,

if, in fact, your assertion is true

and Karson is his biological child,

what do you want from him?

Just, he's a boy.

Boys need their dad.

So, just be there for my son.

All right, in light of everything I've heard,

we need to get some answers.

'Cause we need to figure out what we're doing here.

Jerome, let me have this envelope.

Here you go.

These results were prepared by DNA Diagnostics

and they read as follows,

"In the case of Thomas v. McKey,

"when it comes to eight-month-old Karson Thomas,

"it has been determined by this court,

"Mr. McKey,

"you are not the father."

THOMAS: Are you serious?

MCKEY: Hmm.

He is not the father, Ms. Thomas.

I'll be damned...

I'm sorry, like I said, I'm sorry.

Do you know who Karson's father is?

Yes, my ex, before I met him.

Did you know that and just want it to be Mr. McKey's?

No, I didn't think of it at all. It was a time space in between.

Honestly, for Karson's sake,

I'm glad we got down to the bottom of this.

I need you to do what you need to do,

and find this child's father.

Because I don't want this baby walking around the streets

of his community, his whole life,

facing what he did as a baby.

It's even bigger than the biology of it.

It's about this child,

being able to understand and be able to say confidently,

"No, that's my mother and that's my father."

All right. That's what I want for him.

All right, I wish you the very best of luck.

Court is adjourned.

For more infomation >> Man Says Baby Looks Like Donald Trump's (Full Episode) | Paternity Court - Duration: 16:44.

-------------------------------------------

Trump: Mueller makes Joseph McCarthy 'look like a baby' - Duration: 11:13.

For more infomation >> Trump: Mueller makes Joseph McCarthy 'look like a baby' - Duration: 11:13.

-------------------------------------------

Full Giuliani: Trump Tower meeting for 'getting information about Clinton" | Meet The Press - Duration: 12:38.

For more infomation >> Full Giuliani: Trump Tower meeting for 'getting information about Clinton" | Meet The Press - Duration: 12:38.

-------------------------------------------

WALLACE: IS PRESIDENT TRUMP TRYING TO STIFLE FREE SPEECH? - Duration: 19:13.

Google is a blind eye and making excuses for someone who doesn't deserve to be

given this type of leash with the authorities of the office of the

presidency many people don't even know who he is and now he has the bigger

voice and that's okay with me because I like taking on voices like that

I've never respected him President Trump saying he's given John Brennan a bigger

platform and Brennan using that platform to go after Republicans for failing to

stand up to this president and it's time now for our Sunday group rich Lowry of

National Review mohel Athey of Georgetown University's Institute of

Politics and public service former Democratic congresswoman Jane Harman

director of the Woodrow Wilson Center and the co-host of Benson and harf on

Fox News Radio Guide Benson congresswoman Harman let me start with

you because Brennan and some of those other former top intelligence officials

they're saying that this is an effort to shut them up but doesn't the president

make a good point there Brennan has a bigger platform than ever he was all

over cable TV was in the New York Times who's being shut up

well I'm no shrink but the speculation is that Trump likes a foil and he's

setting Trump up to be this foil writer demonize him Brennan and frankly I think

that that Brennan's Irish as he calls it maybe is not as effective as if he

talked more quietly but be that as it may he has a right to free speech and

that letter that was discussed by 14 former senior cia folks plus the really

compelling op-ed by bill McRaven who was in charge of the takedown of Osama bin

Laden I don't know what political party he is but he was honored by the Wilson

Center for his public service and is a genuine American Hero says I think

everything you don't revoke security clearances when there's no violation of

classified material I personally have one by the way because I'm a member of

the defense policy board and I'm not tell the president that I'm

telling you that there doesn't secure D clearance rich what do you think of the

president moving against Brennan and according to reports

apparently soon moving against at least some of these other nine officials he

seemed to link a lot of this to the Russia investigation

telling The Wall Street Journal here it is I call it the rigged witch hunt it is

a sham and these people the the ten people were talking about here let it so

I think it's something that had to be done your reaction well first of all

we're talking about mostly symbolism here right I mean no one the reason why

former officials have these security clearances is in theory current

officials can consult with them but no Trump official is going to consult with

John Brennan over on that because there was a world prior to January of 2017

where they did consult and and people were brought back in and the idea was

you might want somebody who's an expert on Russia or the Middle East or whatever

to be able to help you but with the way Brennan has conducted himself forecloses

any opportunity to cooperate with this administration and I do think he crossed

a line it's just a really bad idea to have someone who was wielding some of

the most sensitive powers in the United States government immediately upon

leaving his office reveal himself to me the most hawkish political actor who is

making wild and outrageous charges now if Trump is just gonna go through and

pick through this this list just arbitrarily without any process without

any clear standard I do think it's a bad idea

it seems Petty and it will even though it has broad powers in this area will

invite some sort of First Amendment challenge I want to turn to another big

story this week and that's the trial of former top Trump campaign chairman Paul

Manafort the first prosecution by the special counsel the jury right now well

not right now because it's the weekend but starting on Monday will do its third

day of deliberation on the 18 counts of tax and bank fraud here's what President

from said about the trial on Friday I think it's a very sad day for our

country he worked for me for a very short period of time

but you know what he happens to be a very good person and I think it's very

sad what they've done to Paul Manafort know I am old enough to remember when we

used to think it was shocking when a president weighed in on a pending case

let alone a case with the jury is in deliberations what do you think of the

president's comments and how important is this metaphor case and the verdict

that comes down for the Special Counsel investigation going forward well I think

it is remarkable what the president said what he said I think it was

inappropriate you know but that can be said about all half the things he says

these days but you're right there was a time when when presidents didn't weigh

in in the middle of a jury deliberation in work they got hammered I remember

Richard Nixon in the middle of the Charles Nance against Barack Obama about

Trayvon Martin yeah it is it was it was inappropriate in those cases and this

was inappropriate look I think if if if there is a guilty verdict I think that

is going to create a sense of momentum behind them all our investigation I

don't think there's any question about that what if there is what if there

isn't then I think there's gonna be further pressure from the president his

allies on Muller to wrap this up and to just just cut the cord now we don't know

what Muller is looking at we don't know everything that he's got we know there's

30 to at least people who have been indicted or pled guilty so far so this

is just the first thread in what I think is an intricate sort of but you have to

agree he brought the manna for a case because he thought it was his best case

if if he goes down and again we don't know what the jury is gonna decide it

would be very damaging you don't know what the jury will decide nor do we know

exactly what else he's got in his in his quiver of arrows I think most people who

kind of assume that that man of force was his best foot forward but we don't

know everything else that he has all right speaking of what we don't know or

didn't know until this morning about the Special Counsel investigation there's a

puzzling story guy in the New York Times that it turns out that Don McGann the

President's Council has done 30 hours of interviews with the special counsel with

the special counsel Robert Muller with the consent of President from

according to the story Magan was so surprised that President Trump was I

know you could go talk in three interviews thirty hours that he and his

lawyer worried was the president trying to set him up to take the fall for

president Trump what do you make of this I mean it was an astonishing story in a

number of ways and that last piece goes to potentially a culture of paranoia

inside the White House but for people who are really at the headline or the

lead and saying oh my gosh this is must be terrible for President Trump there

are a few concrete details in the story that I think actually are not totally

vindicating but at least interesting for example according to The Times story

McGann told investigators quote that he never saw mr. Trump go beyond his legal

authorities and also the very notion that the president said yes please go

speak to Muller with no restrictions that does not sound to me like a

president who believes that he has deep secrets to hide or that he's done

something wrong if his at least his initial position was to send the chief

White House lawyer to talk to Muller in an unrestricted way with his permission

I mean to me that is a fascinating nugget that does color our understanding

of how the president views his culpability or lack thereof or that on

the on the matter or that the president how the president views the White House

Counsel right I mean the White House Counsel is not the president's personal

lawyer the White House Counsel is the lawyer for the White House where he

could have claimed executive privilege but there's also some nuggets in that

story about how the president thought that McGann would go out there and get

his back in these interviews which is I think a misreading I just want to find a

word from you rich on all of this because the president has been on a

Twitter tear today about this and he's saying that the New York Times it's a

fake story and that they're implying that somehow McGann turned into John

Dean in the Watergate case and was a rat and in fact this was all done with the

cooperation and the consent of the president and it shows that he has

nothing to hide yeah well clearly they could have stopped him if they wanted to

and I just think it's it's malpractice even if you're in full cooperation mode

not to try to limit this interview to some extent just to protect the

prerogatives of the presidency but what guy had hit on if it's true that McGann

was worried that the president was going to throw him under the bus so he thought

he had to go and to the most folsome interview as possible that speaks to a

deep dysfunction at the very heart of the White House and it could be Rudy

Giuliani who's moved in here and doesn't want him again around anymore that could

be the motivation it's a little light for them he's already done the thirty

hours of energy 30 hours but if he's removed now he presumably can't do

whatever it is that he's doing I mean there's too much intrigue I worked in

the Carter White House which was a lot quieter those were different times all

right panel we have to take a little break we'll see you a bit later in the

program up next the Trump economy is kicked into high gear but will it last

White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney joins us next

you need to buy a car and you want to get an excellent price you'd think with

all these options it would be easy but with Toronto economic strategy is

working we have president who in my words and there's talent folks that take

a rip of the ball and they're doing it we'll discuss the economy and a possible

government shutdown with White House budget director Mick Mulvaney next the

economy has been a bright spot for president Trump highlighted by strong

growth and low unemployment but trade wars and a possible government shutdown

loom on the horizon joining us now White House budget director Mick Mulvaney

director Melvin let's start with the economy where there are clearly some

great numbers I'm going to put them up on the screen GDP growth in the second

quarter 4.1 percent overall unemployment 3.9 percent the jobless numbers for

blacks Hispanics and young people are the lowest in decades here's what White

House economic advisor Larry Kudlow told the cabinet this week we are crushing it

and people say this is not sustainable it's a 1/4 blips just nonsense but

director Mulvaney there are other economists who say that we're on a sugar

high based on tax cuts and big government spending that won't last I

want to put up the projection from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office

recent projection growth of 3.1 percent this year 2.4 percent in 2019 and back

down to 1.7 percent in 2020 are they wrong yeah we think that they are keep

in mind all of the folks who are now saying it's it's just a short-term sugar

high it's just a blip it's not sustainable

including the CBO are the same people who said it was impossible to get to 3%

in the first place they have a vested interest in seeing us fail when my

favorite lines came I think from Paul Krugman who said that about the time we

rolled out our first budget which introduced this concept of 3% growth

sustainable 3 percent growth he said you could make him complete dictator of the

country and he couldn't get you there so there's a lot of folks who interested in

seeing us fail because we are proving that if you regulate yet less if you let

people keep more money that the American economy can grow

and that growth is sustainable the White House talks you talk other top officials

the president about all the jobs that have been created but I want to look at

the record because I I found out and a surprising statistic this week 3.4

million jobs have been added during the first 19 months of the Trump

administration but 3.7 million jobs were added during the last 19 months of the

Obama administration more jobs so in fact there hasn't been a spike in jobs

created under this president right keep in mind that when you're coming back

from a recession it's actually easier to do that it's easier to do what President

Obama had done it the criticism we had so many of us had including myself and

President Obama was that he wasn't adding enough jobs that those numbers

that you saw coming off of a recession were way below historical American

averages you look at how quickly the economy came back after the recession

under the Reagan administration that the Obama recovery lagged behind all of our

the recession was in 2008 we're talking about 2015 and 16 eight seven eight

years into the Obama presidency versus the first 19 months of the trump

presidency true but when you come out of a deep recession as we did in the 1980s

and we did again in the in the 2000s you should seem dramatically increased

growth and increased job creation what you've seen here with them with our

administration's we've able to start at a fairly high level and continue that

growth level most folks would expect it to sort of tail off at this point but

we're not we're actually growing faster we're adding jobs you've mentioned a lot

of the statistics my favorite statistic is that for the first time in the

history of the country we have more job openings than we have people who are

there to fill them so we've been able to do this at a time that most folks again

thought it was not possible to do but get back to your original point about

whether or not it's sustainable and the reason we do think it's sustainable so

we're changing sort of the infrastructure of the economy that the

things we've done on the deregulatory agenda the things we've done on taxes

are not a sugar high it's not a one-time sort of pop to the system it's

fundamentally changing the way we create wealth in this country we do think it's

sustainable in the long term in fact I think we're already starting to see some

folks projects that we're gonna have maybe again at least 3% maybe 4% growth

again this quarter you're seeing it start to build that momentum alright

one possible roadblock out there one big issue for the next few weeks is the

possibility the president has threatened a possible shutdown of the government on

September 30th if he doesn't get full funding for the wall and doesn't get a

number of other major immigration reforms does he have to get all of that

by the end of the fiscal year or September 30th where is he willing to

put this confrontation off till after the midterm election a couple of

different things have always fascinated with the media the fascination with s

narrative about a shutdown we were supposedly

going to have a shutdown just about every six months according to the media

we have it with us on the media president Trump has been talking about a

shutdown lots this is not generated by us is generated by the White House

that's fair it's just I'm always fascinated with the folks always want to

talk about a shutdown but the only shutdown we've had since I've been in

the Trump administration was actually caused by Senate Democrats but come back

to your to your questions which is what does the president have to have I think

this is the president's position on this and we've communicated I was in the Oval

Office when he communicated this to the leaders in the House and the Senate like

look we're spending way too much money everybody knows that we had to give the

Democrats a bunch of money in order to get the National Defense funding that we

needed during that last omnibus but the president saying is one no more

omnibuses he's not going to do that anymore and number two I don't think he

should spend all of this money because we don't need to but if you do I'd like

to have my priorities funded that's a reasonable position for the president to

take I'm asking I don't I'm asking a specific question though sir and that is

does it is is the drop-dead time for that September 30th or is it gonna push

this off til after the midterms oh and it's a fair question to ask but as I've

told you before in the show I don't negotiate with you when you go shaped

mostly with Senate Democrats so no we're gonna continue to go through the process

the house and the Senate actually spend money under our system as you know

they've actually done a pretty good job so far that the Senate has passed nine

of their 12 spending bills I think the house may have passed almost all of

theirs as well so they're making progress they're ahead of their schedule

from where they were in previous years so I think all signs are good that we're

gonna actually get some spending bills passed before the end of the end of the

fiscal year I want to get in to more subjects when we're running out of

the president announced Friday that he is canceling the big military parade in

Washington in November because of skyrocketing costs he tweeted this the

local politicians who run Washington DC poorly no a windfall when they see it

when asked to give us a price for holding a great celebratory military

parade they wanted a number so ridiculously high that I cancelled it

never let someone hold you up the implication there director Mulvaney was

that somehow DC officials were trying to gouge the federal government but DC

Mayor Muriel Bowser came back she said the fact is although the president has

been talking about this since February that your office OMB never came to them

until this last Tuesday to talk about this that they said it's gonna cost the

city 20 million dollars and it was the military that said it's going to cost

them 50 million and that placing the blame on on the city is just wrong a

couple of different things than that first of all if the parade had been

canceled purely for fiscal reasons I imagine I would have been in the room

when that decision was made and I wasn't so my guess is there were other

contributing factors but come back to the relationship between the city and

the president I mean I like the mayor she seems like a nice lady but face it

this is a city that voted probably I don't know 7080 percent against the

president so to think that maybe that the City Council of Washington DC is not

trying to help the president accomplish what he wants to accomplish shouldn't be

news to anybody of the 20 million dollars that you've just mentioned to me

as a number that I find that's a number let's put it this way I'm not familiar

with the numbers that I've saw from this city we're much higher than that all

right I've got to move on to my final subject and that is a story in The New

York Times this weekend that the Trump administration will propose new

regulations this week that will leave it up to individual states to decide how to

regulate and even whether to regulate power plants fueled by coal isn't this a

national problem that needs a national standard not state-by-state solutions

Chris I don't mean to dodge your question but I believe that that matters

being considered right now at OMB and our internal rules from administration

to administration is that we do not comment on anything that's being

overseen by the Office of Information and regulatory affairs I apologize I

didn't even ask that I don't think I can speak to that and I

do let me just say the president supposedly is going to announce this on

Tuesday so it sounds like it's been decided again you think I can't speak to

that director Mulvaney thank you thanks for joining us today thank you for

speaking to all the things you couldn't we'll stay on top of all of these

developments irk please come back thanks Chris when we come back New York's

Andrew Cuomo says America was never that great our Sunday panel returns to

discuss how this may affect his prospects for running against president

Trump in 2020

you

No comments:

Post a Comment