so "the new york times" comply. they wouldn't accept evidence that was coming, being printed in european publications. they pretended the evidence was not quality evidence. it wasn't good enough. people had escaped, firsthand accounts, for the most part, they ignored it. three scholars in particular written about this. how many people know that "the new york times" self-censored when it came to the holocaust ten yearsyo before, when stalin was slaughtering the ukrainians and slaughtering them to death, they had a correspondent in moscow, they got a pulitzer prize for the reporting, covered up what stalin had committed against the ukraine. this is "the new york times," can any other in the business survive that. let alone be called the paper of record? all of the news fit to print. "the new york times" still hadn't significantly and seriously dealt with this. it keepsfi the pulitzer prize. two massive genocides in the last century. you don't find a lot about it in the pages of "the new york times" at the time. that's

to the new york times, new york times was owned by a jewish publisher, but he didn't want his newspaper to be pigeonholed as a jewish newspaper. he very much was supportive of the new deal and fdr and fdr didn't want to focus on the holocaust. what they did was worse than push it to the back pages. the american people really didn't know much about the holocaust until 1944. >> in the american involvement lagged behind as well. >> that's correct, and millions of people who are being killed, you would expect the new york times to at least point that out. they had front-page stories in the new york times of events where hundreds of people were killed. not involving jews, and they had other kinds of events, people might say they were focused on the war but the whole new york times was not focused on the war. they did a lot of reporting on other things. local things going on in new york city, other things going on in our country and so forth. but the holocaust was given short shrift. i want to think about this. you're the paper record. you have more journalistic resources, not just in the uni

what this "new york times" report shows us is it was ualwas a scam. even in the years leading up to "the art of the deal," he'd lost hundreds of millions of dollars. while he was losing money, his father was making money. in fact, his fathers only losses were investments in his son, and he'd already given his son the equivalent in 2019, like $415 million to get him started. he lost all of that money. he lost all the $415 million and more. >> this is the second chapter in a story that began by the same group of reporters at "the new york times" in october, when they wrote the piece about fred trump, donald trump's father who gave donald trump all the money he squandered over the years. this is the next chapter in a story that, again, does more than poke a hole. it deflates the entire narrative around donald trump, which is that he made himself into this magnate in new york city. got on tv, wrote books about how to be a magnate. >> so rich. >> got a tv show that was based upon the fact that he was great at business and he could teach you to be great at

what is your reaction to "the new york times"?t they did not get this right until sunday, that happened on thursday. >> it is very painful to me, i have written more op-eds and articles than any law professor in history and i felt close to "the new york times," when i saw this cartoon it just shocked me. it is borrowed from the 1940 nazi cartoon that shows the jewe stereotype, long nose, calling winston churchill into war, jews control the world, they tell world leaders what to do, they always operate in their own interest, buto "the new york times" cartoon was worse, because it portrayed the leader of israel with a jewish star around his neck as a dog as dehumanized. and the distance between "the new york times" editorial office and that synagogue in san diego gets smaller and smaller as the media gets more quicker and quicker, and the fear is that somebody with a gun, maybe with a psychiatric illness will see dehumanizing cartoons like this -- >> sean: four days, professor, i looked at that and i saw in two seconds what it is. >

so "the new york times" comply. they wouldn't accept evidence that was coming, being printed in european publications. they pretended the evidence was not quality evidence. it wasn't good enough. people had escaped, firsthand accounts, for the most part, they ignored it. three scholars in particular written about this. how many people know that "the new york times" self-censored when it came to the holocaust ten years before, when stalin was slaughtering the ukrainians and slaughtering them to death, they had a correspondent in moscow, they got a pulitzer prize for the reporting, covered up what stalin had committed against the ukraine. this is "the new york times," can any other in the business survive that. all of the news fit to print. "the new york times" still hadn't significantly and seriously dealt with this. it keeps the pulitzer prize. two massive genocides in the last century. you don't find a lot about it in the pages of "the new york times" at the time. that's the kind of media that we're talking about.

we continue with anne barnard, reporter at "the new york times." her latest piece "inside syria's secret torture prisons: how bashar al-assad crushed dissent." with nermeenman shaikh. tells the story of mariam khlief. was helping injured protesters, which was considered terrorism by the government. 2012 ands arrested in taken to one of the facilities. she was raped, she said, every night by the chief of investigations of the prison, who she knew by name, and documents we have seen show the head of the investigations in that facility was in fact the kernel. she was held in the prison with a number of other women in a basement cell where the six women barely felt -- it. there were taken to the colone s l's office and he's to bring his frfriends in raping them. the syrian refugee crisis, the millions and millions come up to six night refugees who are now living outside their country. president trump welcomed the hungarian prime minister the tour mantra the white house on monday. the far right nationalist leader is known for his hard-line anti-immigrat

so "the new york times" comply. they wouldn't accept evidence that was coming, being printed in european publications. they pretended the evidence was not quality evidence. it wasn't good enough. people had escaped, firsthand accounts, for the most part, they ignored it. three scholars in particular written about this. how many people know that "the new york times" self-censored when it came to the holocaust ten years before, when stalin was slaughtering the ukrainians and slaughtering them to death, they had a correspondent in moscow, they got a pulitzer prize for the reporting, covered up what stalin had committed against the ukraine. this is "the new york times," can any other in the business survive that. all of the news fit to print. "the new york times" still hadn't significantly and seriously dealt with this. it keeps the pulitzer prize. two massive genocides in the last century. you don't find a lot about it in the pages of "the new york times" at the time. that's the kind of media that we're talking about.

"the new york times" is rocked by the anti-semitism scandal. it is pretty despicable, disgusting, alan dershowitz will explain why this is even worse than you think along with victor davis hanson. straight ahead. ♪ many people living with diabetes monitor their blood glucose every day. which means they have to stop. and stick their fingers. repeatedly. today, life-changing technology from abbott makes it possible to track glucose levels. without drawing a drop of blood, again and again. the most personal technology, is technology with the power to change your life. life. to the fullest. when it comes to reducing the evsugar in your family's diet,m. coke, dr pepper and pepsi hear you. we're working together to do just that. bringing you more great tasting beverages with less sugar or no sugar at all. smaller portion sizes, clear calorie labels and reminders to think balance. because we know mom wants what's best. more beverage choices, smaller portions, less sugar. balanceus.org ♪ >> sean: now "the new york times" is still embroiled in the s

"the new york times" barely covered it. barely covered theho holocaust "the new york times" is owned by a jewish family. because he decided he didn't want his newspaper to be seen as a o jewish newspaper but more universal. fdr didn't want to focus on the holocaust so "the new york times" complied they would not accept evidence it was coming it was in european publications they pretended the evidence was not quality evidence people had escaped with first-hand accounts and they ignored it. three scholars in particular how many knows that they self-centered the holocaust ten years before when stalin was starving them to death they had a correspondent inor moscow who got a pulitzer prize for his reporting covering up the slaughter that stalin had committed. "the new york times" as any other business survive that to be called the paper of record? 's and still have significantly dealt with this to massive genocides in the last century you would not find a hell of a lot about it in the pages at "the new york times" at the time th

well, on twitter tonight, one of the reporters on this new "new york times" piece sort of bottom lines the dad and lad story. the trump sr./trump jr. dynamic now that they've got access to all of this new information about trump the younger. suzanne craig bottom lines this on twitter tonight as this. "father and son, we now have tax information on fred trump and donald trump for a number of years. the up shot, fred always made a lot of money. donald always lost a lot of money." in terms of the new information they got ahold of, russ butner and suzanne craig obtained basically ten years of federal tax information from trump from '85 -- 1985 to 1994. now, they don't have his full returns. they say they've got printouts from his irs tax transcripts and they've got specific data from his basic federal tax form from his 1040. but from that information, what they're able to piece together is just brutally negative. "the numbers show that in 1985, the first year for which they obtain new tax information from the president, 1985, trump reported losses of $46.1 million from his core businesses.

well, on twitter tonight, one of the reporters on this new "new york times" piece sort of bottom lines the dad and lad story. the trump sr./trump jr. dynamic now that they've got access to all of this new information about trump the younger. susanne craig bottom lines this on twitter tonight as this -- "father and son: we now have tax information on fred trump and donald trump for a number of years. the upshot? fred always made a lot of money. donald always lost a lot of money." in terms of the new information they got ahold of, russ buettner and susanne craig obtained basically ten years of federal tax information from trump from '85 -- 1985 to 1994. now, they don't have his full returns. they say they've got printouts from his irs tax transcripts and they've got specific data from his basic federal tax form from his 1040. but from that information, what they're able to piece together is just brutally negative. quote, the numbers show that in 1985, the first year for which they obtain new tax information from the president, 1985, trump reported losses of $46.1 million from his core bu

new york times." the breaking news tonight is that "the new york times" has obtained ten years of donald trump's tax information. "the new york times" report tells us three big things. one, donald trump doesn't pay taxes. two, donald trump loses massive amounts of money in business. and three, donald trump has always been financially dependent on his father. those are all things that donald trump does not want voters to know about his financial life. all of those things clash with the image of successful businessman that donald trump presents to his supporters. it is possible that the six years of tax returns that have been legally demanded from the irs by house ways and means committee chairman richard neal would reveal a similar partner for donald trump possibly with financial supporters other than his father, like perhaps a russian oligarch or two. those tax returns are being illegally withheld from chairman neal by treasury secretary steven mnuchin, but chairman neal will eventually succeed in obt

in the new york times, exact same here. >> he also wrote a book. the art of a comeback. he said above depreciation one of the debates with hillary clinton. i was at times retreated? >> the details, we have known all along. >> i remember the debates when he passed, duchess. >> he avoids it. >> it's illegal. i don't know why i've not heard more. more from bernie sanders and others, normally against this. less taxes than i did. >> a million or by the way. >> in the presidents tweet, he said book, i did it. everybody did it. it's perfectly legal. then he calls the time story inaccurate and says how can be true? >> and a very trump way, both things are true. the first part of the tweet and new york times revelation, the president supporters who have embraced his spirit of you're going to short the system, get as much out of these people, these elites as we can. they love that. the idea that you would get as many write-offs as possible and that would be a sport, it's something they love. at the same time, he disagrees with the way the new york times is r

that chose to shape it in that way and all of a sudden the failing new york times is not failing so much because he's now extrapolating from that. >> this comes in the week of facebook banning several people including alex jones on the right, twitter also and the president has been complaining repeatedly about unfair censorship of conservatives, he tweets this, when will the radical left media apologize for not only getting the russian collusion delusion story wrong, why is new york times, washington post, cnnn, allowed to be on twitter in facebook, much of what they do in fake news, it's now censorship to keep media organizations on social media? >> unless they are seeing outrageous things, but on this i think when we talk about the facebook and the twitter angle what i found most interesting about the farakon statement they were saying he was right wing which he was not. huge error. once again there's that, twitter is private business, business that can put out there, allow people on who they want. when it comes to the president critiquing them, he's helped twitter stock quite a b

not from the new york times the washington post or even c.n.n. but from social media and from twitter and from facebook and a range of other media so i think it's going to be hard to screen go to the united states to make kind of distinction that the justice department is trying to make in this indictment it's funny you say they don't want to be associated with his kind of journalism site hersh the pulitzer prize winner. supposed the massacre has been on this show has already said that this isn't jet tradition threatens the new york times washington post c.n.n. them as n.b.c. perhaps all journalists use weiqi leaks now as a as a really important source is that why this indictment is so important to the to the u.s. security state the so-called military industrial complex well even if they didn't use wiki leaks as a source it would be very important because going after the mere publisher going after the person who did the actual publication as distinguished from the person who stole the material of who had a duty not to disclose it because they wor

tear down credible sources for news, "the washington post," "new york times," cnn. he was questioning why these news organizations have the ability to be on twitter. >> why are they not banned? >> right. saying infowars should be reinstated. >> fake news is real, real news is fake. do you see an answer to oliver's question? >> i think there might be a challenge with respect to the framing. the category cal condemnation, it's extremist, racist, anti-semitic. i think judging and parsing the context of particular claims, particular assertions from different outlets, people is totally different. scrutinizing, however, just the broader concern that is starting to be raised in a lot of different circles with respect to censorship, highlighting that is very important. speech is dangerous. there are ideas unsavory that he we don't like. of course, facebook shouldn't be coerced into associating with people against their own desires. but the fact that speech can be dangerous, i think it's far more dangerous to engage in censorship. it's far more dangerous to have a culture th

us from the new york times. they've gotten president trump's tax records for a decade. the 80s into the 90s. they show a lot of reasons this president doesn't want to show you his taxes from now or then or whatever. the times reporter worked with susan craig, is it right? >> yes. >> and investigative journalist david k. johnson also had some of trump's 2005 taxes sent to him. he's been reported on this for many years vindicated in part by the reporting from the new york times today. so two things. one, i am not familiar with the president as a stock investor or a front runner of stocks. you put it in the piece. how sure are you of it and what does it say to you? >> i don't think it's news to the people that covered president trump in the 1980s. there was a brief period where he seems to have learned that he could just talk about buying a company. he would buy a significant investment in a company with a loan from a broker and make a public comment or leak a public comment that he might take it over. the stock wo

the "new york times" story right now says two. that's up from one. my guess it's a lot more other than that. if you listen to what the attorney general barr said yesterday, as sophisticated as this operation was to have a fisa warrant on someone there had to be more involvement with the level of people. i hold to what i said a year ago. i want to know how spies were run into the trump campaign. i don't know but we will get the answer and get it out to the american people. >> sean: i count 3 instances with fisa. don't stop what you are doing. this is too important to the foundational principles of the country. when we get back. right out of a bond movie. set up. pretty young girl and spying. george papadopoulos on america getting to the truth and spying on the trump campaign. straig >> sean: as we told you the "new york times" got around to reporting on real spying on the trump campaign. the fbi sent a female government investigator to meet with the trump campaign advisor george papadopoulos to get dirt on trump's connections to russia. dirt we know n

a typical new york times a fake story. the next day the washington post reported on the same event but added that mcgahn had not told the president directly he intended to resign rather than carry out the directive to have the special counsel terminated. in that respect the post story clarified the times story which could be read to suggest that mr. mcgahn had told the president of his intentions to quit causing the president to back down from the order to have the special counsel fired. the president seeks to have mcgahn dispute the press reports . on january 26, 2018 the presidents personal counsel calls mcgahn's attorney and says that the president wanted mcgahn to put out a statement denying he had been asked to do fire the special counsel and that he had threatened to quit in protest. mcgahn's attorney spoke with mcgahn about that request then called the presidents personal counsel to relay that mcgahn would not make a statement. mcgahn's attorney informed the presidents personal counsel that the times story was accur

the "new york times" is closing in. the new york state legislature is closing in, and the chairman of the house ways and means committee is closing in on donald trump's taxes. that's next. ritis, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage. ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. vo: humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. woman: help stop the clock on further irrev

>> older black voters as we wrote in "the new york times" this morning. there is not just a sense of it has to be someone who can talk to white people among only white moderates. i was in south carolina in columbia with black voter after black voter telling me the reason they like joe biden is not just because of his vice presidentsy with barack obama, but they feel like he can bring the country together. so it's one of those things that may not be based in fact as we're saying, but it's so perception driven. it's so punditry driven. >> and people will vote on feelings. quickly because i got to go. >> also remember that black voters liked hillary clinton in 2007. they liked her more than they liked barack obama until barack obama won the iowa caucuses, and then black voters fled hillary clinton and moved to barack obama. so whoever is winning the black vote right now is completely meaningless to what might happen in january and february next year. >> we shall see. fascinating. thank you for coming. please come back. i like having you guys here. thank you.

according to "the new york times," don mcgahn actually considered doing it. and then the mueller report came out. here's a quote. mr. don mcgahn initially entered the white house request, but after the report was released detailing the range of actions, mr. trump took to try to impede the inquiry, mr. don mcgahn declined to put out a statement. donald trump was angry and believed that don mcgahn had shown disloyalty by telling investigators for the special counsel that trump's attempts to maintain control over the mueller investigation, this means don mcgahn has to testify. but if he comes before your committee, wouldn't it perhaps be worth asking him whether or not the fact that he considered actually doing this. and then the mueller report comes out and shows that donald trump committed obstruction of justice. >> let me say this. as you know, we voted this week to hold the attorney general in contempt of congress. we expect mr. don mcgahn to appear before our committee on the 21st of this month. if he does not appear, respect the subpoena that he has receiv

it turns out, and other "new york times" confirms, it was a sting. if you read down further, it starts with papadopoulos because they're so shady, they were investigating him. if you read further down in "the new york times," they say they never turned up anything on him. in the end, what he got in trouble for was lying to the people who were trying to trap him. when you look at the circular logic of all of this, the best of the democrats can come up with now -- and we heard it during this hearing -- against the president is, "well, you didn't report it." they are saying, "when we try to trap you, you then didn't turn around and report to the people who were trying to trap you that we were trying to trap you." >> harris: the irony of that, too, ed henry, on the one side it's being alleged that the trump campaign got a debriefing on people targeting them, foreign governments. if this was in fact our own government, it would be a moot point whether or not they got a briefing on foreign governments interfering or listening in. >> ed: absolutely. think a

he now admits to "the new york times," that is not really what he did. he doesn't describe any work that he did, and the problem of course is that hunter biden had no background in ukraine, no background in energy, what he did have was a father who was vice president of thent united states, who was responsible for all aid flow of western dollars going to ukraine, and joe biden made decisions about when to look the other way, when money disappeared, as they did with privat bank, and other instancey when it did. d it is just a pattern, laura, we talked about it on your show before as it relates to china. the biden family has cashed in while joe biden was vice president, and they are not refuting any of the facts simply attacking me, and in this case, "the new york times." >> laura: in a few moments i'm going to talk to secretary of state pompeo about biden's curious position on china, that they are not a threat at all. i guess just a friendly country that is not very powerful. do you think we are going to learn more about this ukraine connection, specifica

joining me is susan craig of the "new york times." she shares the byline of this record, showing over $1 billion in business losses. this is incredible in its scope and detail. you could just lay out in your reporting and again it is on the "new york times," so people should go and read the full thing. but we're talking over a billion dollars over a decade. >> that is just for his core businesses. every year that we looked at, he lost money and the losses grew as he went further into the casinos and the losses that hop in there. but it is unbelievable. we would have thought at least in one of the years that we saw, maybe the year he wrote "art of the deal", he would have made money but he didn't. he was bleeding money every year that we looked at his businesses. >> and certainly years donald trump according to your reporting lost more than nearly any other individual taxpayer in the united states, is that right? >> yeah. it is incredible because we had both tax information and able to compare it to a data base of people who make a fai

steve: that is the cover of the new york pest. rather "the new york times." the cover of "the daily news," biggest loser, our huge successful president claimed a losses of bill dollars decades of low new tax records reportedly reveal. the tax records according to "new york times" by somebody with legal access. ainsley: that is disturbing. steve: we don't know if it is one of his attorneys or tax guys. somebody in the government. brian: michael cohen maybe? steve: we don't know. they didn't name that. these particular reports and tax returns apparently were from all the way from 25 to 35 years ago. so that was a long time ago. and there is nothing in ther to to suggest that donald trump did anything wrong. so he went on twitter to explain how the real estate business in the '80s and '90s worked. ainsley: he said real estate developers in '80s and '90s more than 30 years ago were entitled to massive writeoffs and depreciation if one was actively building show tax losses in all cases. was non-monetary. sometimes considered tax shelter. you get it by building or

going to be based in our main news room and to work very closely with times journalists in new york city across america and around the world it will partner with open innovation group and get early access to 5 g. technology and equipment. doreen tobin has been on the new york times board of directors since 2004 until 2009 she was verizon the vice president and chief financial officer after her retirement from horizon tobin was given 3 and a half $1000000.00 and then signed a year long consulting contract that paid her a whopping $125000.00 per month as for the articles experts on 5 g.b. ryan fox spent 15 years at the national security agency and was a computer analyst in the us army now he's an executive at the cyber intelligence firm new knowledge the very same firm that rand what its own internal report called an elaborate false flag operation and the 2017 alabama special senate race and then there's molly mchugh a new conservative think tank or unregistered foreign agent who once wrote that fighting a new cold war would be in america's interest so whose interest is this article s

the "new york times" is closing in. the new york state legislature is closing in, and the chairman of the house ways and means committee is closing in on donald trump's taxes. that's next. taxes that's next. woman 1: this... woman 2: ...this... man 1: ...this is my body of proof. man 2: proof of less joint pain... woman 3: ...and clearer skin. man 3: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 4: ...with humira. woman 5: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. (avo): humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been

why would the "new york times" choose now? it seems like an odd time now to put on the front page, yeah, looks like the fbi put a government investigator into the campaign real close to try to see if they were working with russia. >> there are two things happening, steve. number one, the "new york times" is going to start dropping these stories to try to get out ahead of it to soften the blow. i think when horowitz comes out with his inspector general report and the department of justice probably in the next 60 days, make some more stuff public and, number two, i also think that nancy pelosi and the explosions you are seeing over in the house and the attacks on the attorney general barr are a precursor to try to discredit the attorney general because the attorney general in his testimony as kim strawfl points out in the "wall street journal" this morning, i think that he was actually saying and foreshadowing that they are pursuing this story with vigor and i think the democrats are trying again to discredit the attorney genera

>> let me read this line from the new york times report. the white house made one of the requests to mr. mcgahn's lawyer before the mueller report was released publicly but after the justice department gave a copy to mr. trump's lawyers to read. they saw he left out mr. mcgahn told investigators he believe mr.structed justice. if mcgahn testifies before congress and says, he didn't believe that the president obstructed justice, what would happen? >> i think there's a bit of a tell. there's a bit of an inference to be made. if don mcgahn didn't perceive it as obstructed, why wouldn't he release a statement and say i don't believe the president obstructed justice. what incentive would there be for him to not weigh in. this wasn't just about putting them on sort of basic notice under already expired law but this was about giving the white house a head start to actually begin interfering with how witnesses in that report were going to discuss their testimony. >> they have really made a historic judgment here. they are going to side with him wit

a new investigation by "the new york times" exposes the financial schemes at the root of the new york city taxi drive crisis. the repoport reveals t that a gp of industry leaders titificial inflateded the cost ofof taxi medallions andndrchestrated a predatatory lending g scheme, collllecting millilions of dolls in the process and putting many drivers into debilitating debt. city agencies did little to curb the system, which a harvard professor quoted in the report called "modern-day indentured servitude." while the advent of rider apps like uber and lyft contributed to a loss of income for licensed taxi drivers, the investigation finds that the taxi medallion bubble had already laid the groundwork for the current driver crisis. at least eight drivers have died by suicide since the start of 2018, with at least some of the drivers linking the decision to their crushing debt. in atlanta, billionaire investor robert smith stunned students at morehouse college when he announced in his commencement speech sunday he would pay off the student debt of the entire graduating class. every classe

"the new york times," this morning, has a front page story as well. this clash might have made the framers gasp. is this a constitutional crisis? >> you know, i talked to a lot of people about this yesterday. i think the answer is still no. as manu said, congress can still go to the court. you know, most experts will tell you we are in a full on constitutional crisis when or if the administration starts ignoring court orders. when the powers that the framers set up essentially break down. we are not there, yet. they are playing this delaying game, essentially, which could put us in a political crisis, which is a different thing and the branches aren't responding to each other and the government is in a real stalemate where nothing happens. that seems more likely now. >> the question being, where do we go from here? mitch mcconnell and nancy pelosi weighed in on that yesterday. >> special counsel's finding is clear. case closed. case closed. this ought to be good news for everyone. my democratic colleagues are publicly working through the five stages o

york times i have recently wrote an article on articles published by the new york times recently regarding the julian assange case in the new york times itself has in the past printed classified information provided by a leaker here is what was written in the new york times regarding the case. notably the new york times among many other news organizations have precisely the same all kinds of documents from wiki leaks without authorization from the government it is not clear how this is legally different from publishing classified information now it's important to note that some of the voices now speaking up with concern regarding the julian assange case are voices that have not been juliana songes biggest fan in the past these are some of the very voices that have been harshly critical of wiki leaks and its activities but even they are voicing some very serious concerns in the aftermath of this new indictment this is a pretty aggressive new move by the justice department a big deal here for a 1st amendment advocates the government is now trying to assert this brand new right to criminally

york times. money-laundering specialist, working for the dutch bank recommended the filing of suspicious activities when transactions by janet trump, president trump, and jerrod fisher's organizations, including transactions with actors overseas. this comes on the heels of other regulators in the trump administration , with weakening regulations on foreign banks, including on that bank. the experts apparently were overruled by senior private wealth division officials. the state regulators, house financial service committee subpoenas, no matter how aggressive or effective the subpoenas, none of them can get at suspicious activity reports that are never filed, obviously. there squash within the bank and never conveyed to the experts in the treasury department or the financial watchdogs that are supports to assess the transactions. compliance officials described a pattern like that to reject filings for lucrative clients. we need to get to the bottom of what happened here. everyone has to follow ant

york times i have recently wrote an article on articles published by the new york times recently regarding the julian assange case in the new york times itself has in the past printed classified information provided by a leaker here is what was written in the new york times regarding the case. the new york times among many other news organizations have precisely the same kinds of documents from wiki leaks without authorization from the government it is not clear how this is legally different from publishing classified information now it's important to note that some of the voices now speaking up with concern regarding the julian assange case are voices that have not been juliana songes biggest fan in the past these are some of the very voices that have been harshly critical of wiki leaks and its activities but even they are voicing some very serious concerns in the aftermath of this new indictment is a pretty aggressive new move by the justice department a big deal here for a 1st amendment advocates the government is now trying to assert this brand new right to criminally prosecute people

should we start with the new york times and julian assange. 17 new counts of violating this espionage act. my understanding of american history is it was rare for a government to treat the leaking of a secret to the news media is a crime yet now we are seeing that this might be a real test case and legal scholars are wanting this might violate the first amendment. there is a precedent in the vietnam war when the pentagon papers were written. they had to test the linking of national security secrets and the case here, what is a different and what the trump administration will try to press is that julian trump administration will try to press is thatjulian assange named people in warzones they buy them and thatis people in warzones they buy them and that is why it is a violation of the espionage act. the obama administration had decided not to press charges because it thought it would be unconstitutional because of the first amendment and also it could have a chilling effect on investigative journalism. what i think is quite interesting is whether or not you can meaningfully separate ju

"the new york times" is finally catching up. there is no secret he went through an incredibly tough financial period in the '80 end '90s. that's when atlantic city casino business actually went belly up. watch the president in 200 200d "the new york times" that they reported this week. this is beyond idiocy. >> i own buildings all over the place. model agencies. the miss universe page and demand pageant, jetliners, golf courses, casinos, and private resorts like mar-a-lago. one of the most spectacular estates anywhere in the world, but it was not so easy. about 13 years ago i was seriously in trouble. i was billions of dollars in debt. but i fought back at, i won, bigly. i use my brain and my negotiating skills and i worked it all out. >> sean: he told the whole story himself. maybe before the media mob breathlessly, historically tries to disperse the president over his taxes, maybe they should just go back and watch old episodes of "the apprentice." separate news from the less hype and hysteria. there was nothing in "the new yo

tim o'brien of "new york times" greatness, now at bloomberg, was part of that. chris vlasto, the big shot over at abc running the investigations now, did it. and the president insisted he was worth billions. hard to believe that given the information that's coming out now. we're going to go through the highlights are of this information and what they mean going forward and what the politics will mean going forward about how the democrats will respond to what they now know is in the past in terms of what they try to get in the present. >> chris, it's a fascinating piece. "the new york times" broke. we'll have more on it in about four minutes. we'll see you then. we'll be right back. more news ahead. i've got an idea! oooh, what is it? what if we give the people iphone xr, when they join t-mobile? for a limited time, join t-mobile and get the awesome iphone xr on us. - [woman] with shark's duo clean, i don't just clean, ♪ i deep clean carpets and floors, so i got this. yep, this too, and this, please. even long hair and pet hair are no problem, but the one thing

york times." that year, 1991. as you see behind me, year after year the president appears to have lost more money than maybe any other individual taxpayer in america. there's a rub on that. a lot of corporations are c corp.s, they file and pay directly. he was a pass-through organization. it's privately held. so he's in a different bucket. but it's still a ton of losses. these should all be red. a decade in the red. why are they blue? deals he bragged about were disasters. and a new allegation that the president may have been front-running stocks in curious fashion to make up some of that loss. a very different narrative to us when he was running for election. >> i built a tremendous business. i filed my papers with the federal election. they couldn't even believe it. there were so many of those guys back there. i built an unbelievable -- some of the greatest assets in the world. very little debt. tremendous cash flow. tremendous. >> cannot believe what he says. the new figures show over $1 billio

the left has a conniption every time they hear the word any new "new york times" is coming around to recognize what it was that the surveillance by the fbi was actual spying. . >> it's interesting to see that using the word spying. but it is pretty clear that the obama administration was potentially looking into the rival administration and president trump has a lot to be upset about. they have been dragged through the mud for the past two and half years despite what we learned from the mueller report now they go into obstruction xyz and why they felt the need to buy off the campaign and then we need to get to the bottom of exactly what happened. people should support this by the way. judge: "the new york times" it is not pejorative. it is a real word. so why was there such a frenzy for them to deny they were spying? . >> i think it was counterintelligence work that wasn't necessarily political but what was his him asking to spy on joe biden and political opponents that's why he could not answer kamala harris question. that is bigger than watergate. judge: you are on the show to answ

"the new york times." they also said political gamesmanship that continues to hold up desperately needed resources. that's what they -- apparently our house democratic colleagues heard president trump and the word border in the same sentence and decided they preferred no action at all to the sensible compromise that even "the new york times" had called for. it's too bad that partisan spite has infected even such blindedly omps such as humanitarian efforts on the southern border. our democratic friends have become so committed to the resistance that they are now, mr. president, to the left of "the new york times" editorial board. to the left of "the new york times" editorial board. nevertheless, we should celebrate the progress that we're making today. the senate passage of this legislation marks a huge step forward for communities across the u.s. that have gone far too long without receiving this federal assistance to help them get back on their feet. finally, the millions of americans who grappled with na

not from the new york times the washington post or even c.n.n. but from social media and from twitter and from facebook and a range of other media so i think it's going to be hard to sprinkle it in states to make kind of distinction that the justice department is trying to make in this indictment it's funny you say they don't want to be associated with his kind of journalism cya hersh the pulitzer prize winner exposed the massacre has been on this show has already said that this isn't jack's addition threatens the new york times washington post c.n.n. them as n.b.c. perhaps all journalists use weiqi leaks now as a as a really important source is that why this indictment is so important to the to the u.s. security state the so-called military industrial complex well even if they didn't use wiki leaks as a source it would be very important because going after the mere publisher going after the person who did the actual publication as distinguished from the person who stole the material of who had a duty not to disclose it. as they work for the unit