Jeb Bush wasn’t invited to Barbara’s surprise wedding

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2018 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. All market data delayed 20 minutes.

The daughter to George and Laura Bush got hitched in a secret, private ceremony in Maine. Here’s a look at some of the special moments with the happy couple.

Jeb Bush wasn’t invited to niece Barbara Bush’s surprise weekend wedding, it was revealed Wednesday.

Former first lady Laura Bush said the former Florida governor and failed presidential candidate didn’t make the cut for the small-scale, and short notice, Oct. 7 nuptials — in which her eldest daughter with former President George W. Bush married actor Craig Coyne.

“Well, I think Barbara just kept it a secret, plus so few people were invited,” the former FLOTUS told journalist Cokie Roberts, who interviewed her on stage at an event in Washington, DC.

“It was just our family and Craig’s family. And we didn’t invite Jeb, or Neil, or any of those Bushes.”

President George W. Bush’s sister, Dorothy Bush Koch, did make the cut – as she served as the couple’s officiant.

The 36-year-old bride chose the family home so her 94-year-old grandfather, former President George H.W. Bush, could be there.

“And so we had a wedding outside, looking at the ocean. And then we went in and had dinner at the dining room table, there were 20 of us at the dining room table,” Laura Bush said. “So it was just perfect. It was Barbara and Craig, her new husband – who we like a lot. And his family and our family.”

Twin sister Jenna Bush Hager’s older daughter Mila was a flower girl, as was Coyne’s niece Emma.

Laura Bush also revealed that Poppy, Jenna Bush Hager’s 3-year-old daughter, played the part of ring bearer.

She “was very proud of being a ring bearer. Of course, the box was empty because they knew that she couldn’t have the ring so Craig had it in his pocket,” Laura Bush described.

“So during the entire ceremony she walked around with the ring box,” Laura Bush said.

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2018 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. All market data delayed 20 minutes.

 

October 11, 2018

Sources: Fox News

Related news

  • Rubio: Trump pardoning Manafort would be a 'terrible mistake'

    Rubio: Trump pardoning Manafort would be a 'terrible mistake'

    ritten, or redistributed. ©2018 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. All market data delayed 20 minutes. </p><p>Special counsel Robert Mueller releases a heavily redacted document in the criminal case against former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort.</p><p>Sen. Marco Rubio warned President Trump on Sunday that it would be a bad idea to pardon Paul Manafort.</p><p>During an appearance on ABC&#x2019;s &#x201C;This Week,&#x201D; Rubio, R-Fla.,&#xA0;said it would be a mistake for Trump to issue a pardon for his former campaign chairman after Special Counsel Robert Mueller accused Manafort of lying about his contacts with administration officials in 2018 and at least four other details related to the investigation into Russian election meddling during the 2016 campaign.</p><p>&#x201C;I haven&#x2019;t heard that the White House is thinking about doing it,&#x201D; Rubio said. &#x201C;I advise strongly against it. It would be terrible mistake.&quot;</p><p>Rubio added: &#x201C;I don&#x2019;t believe any pardon should be used in these cases. It doesn&#x2019;t pass the smell test.&#x201D;</p><p>In a filing released Friday evening, prosecutors said Manafort lied about his contacts with a Russian associate and Trump administration officials, including in 2018.</p><p>The court papers say Manafort initially told prosecutors he didn&apos;t have contact with any people while they were in the Trump administration. But prosecutors say they recovered &quot;electronic documents&quot; showing contacts with multiple administration officials not identified in the filings.</p><p>Manafort, who has pleaded guilty to several counts, violated his plea agreement by telling &quot;multiple discernible lies&quot; to prosecutors, they said.</p><p>Manafort resigned from his job on the Trump campaign as questions swirled about his lobbying work for a pro-Russia political party in Ukraine.</p><p>&#x201C;It was never discussed, but I wouldn&#x2019;t take it off the table,&#x201D; Trump said. &#x201C;Why would I take it off the table?&#x201D; the president said during an Oval Office interview.&#x201D;</p><p>This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2018 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. All market data delayed 20 minutes.</p>

    1 December 09, 2018
  •  Senate Dem: Mueller probe now 'beyond the stage' of Clinton impeachment

    Senate Dem: Mueller probe now 'beyond the stage' of Clinton impeachment

    hment proceedings against President Clinton, whether or not you think that that was worthy of impeachment or not,” Murphy said. </p><p> Murphy compared Trump’s status in the investigation, with the special counsel linking the president to illegal activity, to that of former President Richard Nixon’s resignation in 1974. </p><p> “The president has now stepped into the same territory that ultimately led to President Nixon resigning the office. President Nixon was an unindicted co-conspirator. Was certainly a different set of facts, but this investigation is now starting to put the president in serious legal crosshairs and he should be worried and the whole country should be worried,” Murphy said. </p>

    1 December 09, 2018
  •  Senate Dem: Mueller probe now 'beyond the stage' of Clinton impeachment

    Senate Dem: Mueller probe now 'beyond the stage' of Clinton impeachment

    hment proceedings against President Clinton, whether or not you think that that was worthy of impeachment or not,” Murphy said. </p><p> Murphy compared Trump’s status in the investigation, with the special counsel linking the president to illegal activity, to that of former President Richard Nixon’s resignation in 1974. </p><p> “The president has now stepped into the same territory that ultimately led to President Nixon resigning the office. President Nixon was an unindicted co-conspirator. Was certainly a different set of facts, but this investigation is now starting to put the president in serious legal crosshairs and he should be worried and the whole country should be worried,” Murphy said. </p>

    1 December 09, 2018
  • Trump blasts 'Leakin' James Comey' following former FBI chief's testimony on Capitol Hill

    Trump blasts 'Leakin' James Comey' following former FBI chief's testimony on Capitol Hill

    ritten, or redistributed. ©2018 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. All market data delayed 20 minutes. </p><p>Lawmakers have released a transcript of former FBI director James Comey's testimony; Catherine Herridge has more details.</p><p>President Trump started off Sunday morning with a series of tweets slamming former FBI Director James Comey&#x2019;s testimony last week during a closed-door questioning in front of Congress.</p><p>&#x201C;On 245 occasions, former FBI Director James Comey told House investigators he didn&#x2019;t know, didn&#x2019;t recall, or couldn&#x2019;t remember things when asked,&#x201D; Trump tweeted. &#x201C;Opened investigations on 4 Americans (not 2) - didn&#x2019;t know who signed off and didn&#x2019;t know Christopher Steele. All lies!&#x201D;</p><p>Steele is the former British intelligence officer with the Secret Intelligence Service MI6 who handed over to the U.S. a dossier that alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.</p><p>During the questioning, Comey said that the FBI&apos;s counterintelligence investigation into potential ties between the Trump campaign and Russia initially focused on four Americans and whether they were connected to Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.</p><p>Comey did not identify the Americans, but said President Trump, then the Republican candidate, was not among them.</p><p>The committee released a transcript of the interview on Saturday, just 24 hours after privately grilling the fired FBI chief about investigative decisions related to Hillary Clinton&apos;s email server and Trump&apos;s campaign and potential ties to Russia. Comey largely dodged questions connected to the current Mueller-led probe, including whether his May 2017 firing by Trump constituted obstruction of justice.</p><p>The Republican-led committee interviewed Comey as part of its investigation into FBI actions in 2016, a year when the bureau &#x2014; in the heat of the presidential campaign &#x2014; recommended against charges for Clinton and opened an investigation into Russian interference in the election.</p><p>The questioning largely centered on well-covered territory from a Justice Department inspector general report, Comey&apos;s own book and interviews and hours of public testimony on Capitol Hill. But the former FBI chief also used the occasion to take aim at Trump&apos;s frequent barbs at the criminal justice system, saying &quot;we have become numb to lying and attacks on the rule of law by the president,&quot; as well as Trump&apos;s contention that it should be a crime for subjects to &quot;flip&quot; and cooperate with investigators.</p><p>&quot;It&apos;s a shocking suggestion coming from any senior official, no less the president. It&apos;s a critical and legitimate part of the entire justice system in the United States,&quot; Comey said.</p><p>In another tweet on Sunday, Trump accused Comey of lying and said the Russia investigation was &#x201C;a Rigged Fraud.&quot;</p><p>&#x201C;Leakin&#x2019; James Comey must have set a record for who lied the most to Congress in one day. His Friday testimony was so untruthful!&#x201D; Trump tweeted. &#x201C;This whole deal is a Rigged Fraud headed up by dishonest people who would do anything so that I could not become President. They are now exposed!&#x201D;</p><p>Multiple Trump associates, including his former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and Trump&apos;s former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, have pleaded guilty to lying about their interactions with Russians during the campaign and presidential transition period. Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort&apos;s foreign dealings, including to an associate the U.S. says has ties to Russian intelligence, also has attracted law enforcement scrutiny.</p><p>Comey reiterated to lawmakers that it was the 2016 encounter between Trump aide George Papadopoulos with a Russian intermediary in London that ignited the Russia investigation, rather than &#x2014; as some Republicans have maintained &#x2014; Democratic-funded opposition research compiled by a former British spy.</p><p>&quot;It was weeks or months later that the so-called Steele dossier came to our attention,&quot; Comey said.</p><p>He said that by the time of his firing, the FBI had not come to a conclusion about whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia&apos;s efforts to sway the election.</p><p>And he insisted that the FBI would recover from the president&apos;s attacks on the bureau.</p><p>&quot;The FBI will be fine. It will snap back, as will the rest of our institutions,&quot; Comey said. &quot;There will be short-term damage, which worries me a great deal, but in the long run, no politician, no president can, in a lasting way, damage those institutions.&quot;</p><p>This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2018 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. All market data delayed 20 minutes.</p>

    1 December 09, 2018
  •  Dem: Illegal payments 'impeachable offense' if Trump ordered

    Dem: Illegal payments 'impeachable offense' if Trump ordered

    he Justice Department and the special counsel need to get to the bottom of the allegations, including questions about lying about business arrangements with Russians and possible obstruction of justice.</p><p> In legal filings Friday, prosecutors for the first time tied Trump to a federal crime, accusing him of directing payments to women who claimed extramarital affairs. He has denied wrongdoing.</p>

    1 December 09, 2018
  • Comey reveals he concealed Trump meeting memo from DOJ leaders

    Comey reveals he concealed Trump meeting memo from DOJ leaders

    ritten, or redistributed. ©2018 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. All market data delayed 20 minutes. </p><p>Lawmakers have released a transcript of former FBI director James Comey's testimony; Catherine Herridge has more details.</p><p>Former FBI Director James Comey revealed in closed-door testimony with House Republicans on Friday that he deliberately concealed an explosive memorandum about his one-on-one Oval Office meeting with President Trump in February 2017 from top Department of Justice officials.</p><p>The former FBI head also acknowledged that when the agency&#xA0;initiated its counterintelligence probe into possible collusion between Trump campaign officials and the Russian government in July 2016, investigators&#xA0;&quot;didn&apos;t know whether we had anything&quot; and that &quot;in fact, when I was fired as director [in May 2017], I still didn&apos;t know whether there was anything to it.&quot;</p><p>Former FBI Director James Comey testifies in closed-door interview on the Hill; chief intelligence correspondent Catherine Herridge reports.</p><p>The fired FBI director wrote in his memorandum that Trump had told him, &quot;I hope you can let this go,&quot; amid reports that Flynn had lied to the FBI and senior White House officials about his contacts with Russia&apos;s government.</p><p>But despite that concern, Comey told Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, that he and his team made a &quot;judgment call&quot; not to tell then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions or his lieutenants about Trump&apos;s comments, saying he thought Sessions&#xA0;would recuse himself &quot;in a matter of days&quot; from the Russia probe.</p><p>&quot;We agreed that we ought to hold it very close, not brief the investigative team at this point and not go over and talk to the leadership of the Department of Justice, to hold onto it until we got a new deputy attorney general and they sorted out how they were going to supervise the Russia investigation,&quot; Comey said.</p><p>Comey testified: &quot;We believed that the Attorney General, Mr. Sessions, was on the cusp of recusing himself from anything related to Russia, so it didn&apos;t make any sense to brief him on it, and that there was no deputy attorney general at that point.&quot;&#xA0; (Sally Yates, a holdover from the Obama administration, was&#xA0;terminated by Trump in late January 2017 after she refused to defend the administration&apos;s ban on travel from several Muslim-majority nations in court.)</p><p>&quot;We agreed that we ought to hold it very close.&quot;</p><p>Lawmakers release transcript of testimony from former FBI Director James Comey; reaction from Rep. Jim Jordan, Republican member of the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees.</p><p>&quot;I don&apos;t know who was No. 3 at that point,&quot; Comey responded. &quot;There was an acting -- there was a U.S. Attorney acting as the deputy attorney general, who we knew would be in the seat only until Rod Rosenstein was confirmed,&quot; he added, in an apparent reference to former Acting Deputy Attorney General Dana Boente, who served until Rosenstein took the job in April 2017.</p><p>Comey continued that &quot;it made sense to hold onto it&quot; because &quot;we saw no investigative urgency.&quot;</p><p>But unredacted sections of Comey&apos;s other memoranda documenting his conversations with Trump apparently demonstrate that he had, in fact, informed Boente about sensitive matters concerning his conversations with the president.</p><p>In a memorandum documenting his conversation with Trump on March&#xA0;30, 2017, about how to &quot;lift the cloud&quot; of the Russia investigation from the White House, Comey wrote, &quot;I called the acting attorney general and relayed the substance of the above and said I was telling him so he could decide what guidance to give me, if any.&quot;</p><p>In a call from the White House that day, Comey wrote that Trump had asked him &quot;several times&quot;&#xA0;to &quot;find a way to get out&quot; to the public that he was not actively under investigation as part of the ongoing federal probe into possible Russia collusion with his team. Comey assured Trump, and congressional leaders, that the president was not being investigated at the time.</p><p>Congressional Republicans are set to have another opportunity to question Comey before they lose majority status when the new Congress is seated in January. The fired FBI director&#xA0;told reporters his return visit for more testimony will likely come the &#x201C;week after next.&#x201D;</p><p>Comey largely frustrated GOP lawmakers during Friday&#x2019;s session, in large part because his lawyers urged him not to answer numerous questions. On Twitter after his testimony, Comey sharply criticized what he characterized as Republicans&apos;&#xA0;&#x201C;desperate attempt to find anything that can be used to attack the institutions of justice investigating this president.&#x201D;</p><p>But while Comey insisted in the interview that &#x201C;we never investigated the Trump campaign for political purposes,&#x201D; the transcript shows he claimed ignorance or memory lapses in response to questions concerning key details and events in the Russia investigation, which some GOP lawmakers continue to claim was improperly conducted.</p><p>The transcript reveals lawmakers&#x2019; frustration with his lack of specifics. Asked if he recalled who drafted the FBI&#x2019;s &#x201C;initiation document&#x201D; for the July 2016 Russia investigation, Comey said, &#x201C;I do not.&#x201D; He again claimed not to know when asked about the involvement in that initiation of Peter Strzok, whose anti-Trump texts later got him removed from the special counsel&#x2019;s probe.</p><p>When asked if the FBI had any evidence that anyone in the Trump campaign conspired to hack the DNC server, Comey gave a lengthy answer referring to Special Counsel Robert Mueller&#x2019;s investigation as to why he couldn&#x2019;t answer.</p><p>Early Sunday, Trump slammed Comey&apos;s testimony repeatedly on Twitter, deriding him as &quot;Leakin&apos; James Comey.&quot;</p><p>But there was a time when Comey, by his own accounting,&#xA0;didn&apos;t think of himself as the kind of person who would leak information behind the president&apos;s back.</p><p>This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2018 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. All market data delayed 20 minutes.</p>

    1 December 09, 2018
  • Three ex-ministers refuse to rule out running against May

    Three ex-ministers refuse to rule out running against May

    she loses a vote on her Brexit plan, but have still sparked speculation.</p><p>Three high-profile former cabinet ministers who quit over Brexit have sparked leadership speculation by refusing to rule out standing to replace Theresa May.</p><p>Esther McVey, Dominic Raab and Boris Johnson all dodged the chance to do so on Sunday morning.</p><p>They each insisted the prime minister could stay on if she loses a Commons vote on her Brexit plan on Tuesday.</p><p>But the three ex-secretaries of state kept their options open when it came to a future challenge to the PM.</p><p>More than 115,000 people have signed our petition - have you?</p><p>Sky News estimates around 100 Tory MPs are expected to reject the deal, with a defeat therefore probable.</p><p>Mrs May survived the threat of a leadership challenge last month, after her critics failed to get the 48 letters needed to force a confidence vote.</p><p>In her first broadcast interview since leaving the government, she told Sky News she would stand to be prime minister "if people asked me".</p><p>Quizzed on Sky News' Sophy Ridge On Sunday whether he had aspirations for the highest office, the Esher and Walton MP said: "I wouldn't rule it out."</p><p>But he has not stayed quiet since joining the backbenches, and refused to rule out running for prime minister on the BBC's Andrew Marr Show.</p><p>A government source has told Sky News the only thing they are certain of is that the prime minister will not quit.</p><p>The vote will represent the climax of 18 months' negotiation with Brussels.</p>

    1 December 09, 2018
  •  'This Week' Transcript 12-9-18: Sen. Marco Rubio and Sen. Chris Murphy

    'This Week' Transcript 12-9-18: Sen. Marco Rubio and Sen. Chris Murphy

    this week filed, no, there's an inconsistency there. That doesn't necessarily mean that that - you know, people here have a presumption in this country that you have to go out and prove these things. That said, look, I've always wanted there to be the truth. That's what I've said from the very beginning. What we want for this country is all the facts, and all the truth. I've always supported the Mueller investigation and continue to do so because I think it's in the best interest of everyone involved, including by the way, the president on many of these issues. </p><p> So I think it's important for that work to go and continue to move forward, and once the American people have before them all the facts and information, then we begin to make political judgments about this. The same is true of the intelligence probe that we've conducted in the U.S. I'm very proud of the work the Intelligence Committee has done. It has not been partisan. In fact, some of the things we've seen released have caused the committee to go back and attempt to re-interview some people to compare to what we saw, and have been released by the special prosecutor, and we're going to continue to do our work. </p><p> So at some point, here soon, the American people are going to have before them the report of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, whatever findings the special prosecutor has moving forward and then we can begin to make some judgments about what needs to happen next. </p><p> RUBIO: Well, look, again, I just -- people have a right to say that that's what happened, especially when facing criminal charges. That doesn't necessarily make it true. It doesn't make it untrue either. Look, I'm not going to -- and there's not way to spin this. This has not been -- this has not been a positive development for the people that are involved in this, but I just think, and we have learned over time that is is important for all of this to be out there before us, in full context compared to other information before we begin to make political judgments. </p><p> And I will tell, when all that information is out there, no one -- no one is more important than our country, no one is held above the law, everyone should also benefit from the presumptions the law has, but from a separate topic, the political judgment we want to make, that has a different standard to it, and my position on that will be based on evidence and the information before the American people on us,both on the Intelligence Committee and through these filings. And until that happens, I just think it’s important that we not ignore these things, but reserve judgment until we have all of it before us. It may make you feel stronger about how you view it now, but the bottom line is… </p><p> RUBIO: … we deserve the full truth on what’s happened. </p><p> RADDATZ: -- seems to have made up his mind. As you know, he tweeted that these filings show he was totally cleared. Do you believe that? </p><p> RUBIO: Well, that, obviously, is the argument the president will make and those around him. He obviously feels strongly about it. It’s about him. I think the rest of us, especially those of us in the position in Congress that we’re in, will have to make our own determination. We’ll have to make our own determinations on the basis of the information before. Right now we are still getting bits and pieces. </p><p> I would concede we have more bits and pieces than we did a couple weeks ago. But I would – before I’m prepared to make a public pronouncement that I’m ready to make judgment on one thing or another, I’d like to have all of the information before. And I also want us to finish our work on the Senate Intelligence Committee because I think that’ll be a big part of this as well. And that’s why I know the position you guys have and the work you need to do in terms of asking tough questions. But we are called upon to make judgments, especially on the Intelligence Committee, and we need more information before we can finish our report. </p><p> RADDATZ: I just want to talk a little more about the southern district campaign finance violation that they found. The president had this to say when asked about it yesterday, whether or not he gave Michael Cohen any direction. </p><p> QUESTION: Sir, did you direct Michael Cohen to commit any violations of law? </p><p> RADDATZ: So, I know you talk about bits and pieces but this is a pretty big piece. So who do you believe, Senator? The president… </p><p> RUBIO: Oh, I don’t know. And neither do you or anyone else… </p><p> RADDATZ: Even from – even from what you’ve already read? </p><p> RUBIO: Well, again, I don’t know who to believe because … </p><p> RADDATZ: The Justice Department very clearly says it. </p><p> RUBIO: Right. That’s the Justice Department’s position and I’m not questioning the work they’ve done. They’ve got someone who now is willing to testify to that fact. The president’s saying that that’s not true. Now, we don’t know what other investigations the Justice Department has to either corroborate it or that they don’t have to corroborate it. So, again, that’s why I think it’s important for all the information to be out here. </p><p> I’m not going to sit here and say that absolutely didn’t happen because it’s possible the Justice Department has additional corroborating evidence. It’s also possible they do not. And now you have the testimony of a witness that’s facing criminal charges and looking for leniency versus someone who denies that it occurred the way they said it occurred. So that’s why I’m telling you, it is important for us to have the full context and all the information before us before we can make final judgments on these issues because we just don’t know what additional information the Justice Department has to either corroborate these – these charges or not. </p><p> RADDATZ: OK, let’s move to Paul Manafort. Just last week, Trump refused to take a pardon for Manafort off the table after Rudy Giuliani acknowledged being in touch with Manafort’s lawyers. If the president pardoned Trump (sic), is that a red line for you, would that be obstructionist (ph) … </p><p> RUBIO: I think it would be a terrible mistake if he did that. I do. I believe it’d be a terrible mistake. You know, pardons should be used judiciously. They’re used for cases with extraordinary circumstances. And I just haven’t heard that the White House was thinking about doing it. I know he hasn’t ruled it out but I haven’t heard anyone say, we’re thinking about doing it. </p><p> I would advise strongly against it, it would be a terrible mistake. I would not be supportive of it, I would be critical of it. I don’t believe that any pardon should be used with relation to these particular cases. Frankly, it – not only does it not pass the smell test, I think it undermines the reason why we have presidential pardons in the first place. And I think, in fact, if something like that were to happen, it could trigger a debate about whether the pardon powers should be amended given these circumstances. </p><p> So I hope they don’t do that, it would be a terrible mistake if they did. </p><p> RADDATZ: OK, thanks very much for joining us, Senator Rubio. </p><p> RADDATZ: Up next, how do Democrats plan to respond to the latest filings by the special counsel and federal prosecutors? We’ll talk to one senator who may also be planning 2020 presidential bid, next. </p><p> That was on – that was time, right? Senator Rubio, thanks so much, appreciate it. </p>

    1 December 09, 2018
  •  'This Week' Transcript 12-9-18: Sen. Marco Rubio and Sen. Chris Murphy

    'This Week' Transcript 12-9-18: Sen. Marco Rubio and Sen. Chris Murphy

    this week filed, no, there's an inconsistency there. That doesn't necessarily mean that that - you know, people here have a presumption in this country that you have to go out and prove these things. That said, look, I've always wanted there to be the truth. That's what I've said from the very beginning. What we want for this country is all the facts, and all the truth. I've always supported the Mueller investigation and continue to do so because I think it's in the best interest of everyone involved, including by the way, the president on many of these issues. </p><p> So I think it's important for that work to go and continue to move forward, and once the American people have before them all the facts and information, then we begin to make political judgments about this. The same is true of the intelligence probe that we've conducted in the U.S. I'm very proud of the work the Intelligence Committee has done. It has not been partisan. In fact, some of the things we've seen released have caused the committee to go back and attempt to re-interview some people to compare to what we saw, and have been released by the special prosecutor, and we're going to continue to do our work. </p><p> So at some point, here soon, the American people are going to have before them the report of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, whatever findings the special prosecutor has moving forward and then we can begin to make some judgments about what needs to happen next. </p><p> RUBIO: Well, look, again, I just -- people have a right to say that that's what happened, especially when facing criminal charges. That doesn't necessarily make it true. It doesn't make it untrue either. Look, I'm not going to -- and there's not way to spin this. This has not been -- this has not been a positive development for the people that are involved in this, but I just think, and we have learned over time that is is important for all of this to be out there before us, in full context compared to other information before we begin to make political judgments. </p><p> And I will tell, when all that information is out there, no one -- no one is more important than our country, no one is held above the law, everyone should also benefit from the presumptions the law has, but from a separate topic, the political judgment we want to make, that has a different standard to it, and my position on that will be based on evidence and the information before the American people on us,both on the Intelligence Committee and through these filings. And until that happens, I just think it’s important that we not ignore these things, but reserve judgment until we have all of it before us. It may make you feel stronger about how you view it now, but the bottom line is… </p><p> RUBIO: … we deserve the full truth on what’s happened. </p><p> RADDATZ: -- seems to have made up his mind. As you know, he tweeted that these filings show he was totally cleared. Do you believe that? </p><p> RUBIO: Well, that, obviously, is the argument the president will make and those around him. He obviously feels strongly about it. It’s about him. I think the rest of us, especially those of us in the position in Congress that we’re in, will have to make our own determination. We’ll have to make our own determinations on the basis of the information before. Right now we are still getting bits and pieces. </p><p> I would concede we have more bits and pieces than we did a couple weeks ago. But I would – before I’m prepared to make a public pronouncement that I’m ready to make judgment on one thing or another, I’d like to have all of the information before. And I also want us to finish our work on the Senate Intelligence Committee because I think that’ll be a big part of this as well. And that’s why I know the position you guys have and the work you need to do in terms of asking tough questions. But we are called upon to make judgments, especially on the Intelligence Committee, and we need more information before we can finish our report. </p><p> RADDATZ: I just want to talk a little more about the southern district campaign finance violation that they found. The president had this to say when asked about it yesterday, whether or not he gave Michael Cohen any direction. </p><p> QUESTION: Sir, did you direct Michael Cohen to commit any violations of law? </p><p> RADDATZ: So, I know you talk about bits and pieces but this is a pretty big piece. So who do you believe, Senator? The president… </p><p> RUBIO: Oh, I don’t know. And neither do you or anyone else… </p><p> RADDATZ: Even from – even from what you’ve already read? </p><p> RUBIO: Well, again, I don’t know who to believe because … </p><p> RADDATZ: The Justice Department very clearly says it. </p><p> RUBIO: Right. That’s the Justice Department’s position and I’m not questioning the work they’ve done. They’ve got someone who now is willing to testify to that fact. The president’s saying that that’s not true. Now, we don’t know what other investigations the Justice Department has to either corroborate it or that they don’t have to corroborate it. So, again, that’s why I think it’s important for all the information to be out here. </p><p> I’m not going to sit here and say that absolutely didn’t happen because it’s possible the Justice Department has additional corroborating evidence. It’s also possible they do not. And now you have the testimony of a witness that’s facing criminal charges and looking for leniency versus someone who denies that it occurred the way they said it occurred. So that’s why I’m telling you, it is important for us to have the full context and all the information before us before we can make final judgments on these issues because we just don’t know what additional information the Justice Department has to either corroborate these – these charges or not. </p><p> RADDATZ: OK, let’s move to Paul Manafort. Just last week, Trump refused to take a pardon for Manafort off the table after Rudy Giuliani acknowledged being in touch with Manafort’s lawyers. If the president pardoned Trump (sic), is that a red line for you, would that be obstructionist (ph) … </p><p> RUBIO: I think it would be a terrible mistake if he did that. I do. I believe it’d be a terrible mistake. You know, pardons should be used judiciously. They’re used for cases with extraordinary circumstances. And I just haven’t heard that the White House was thinking about doing it. I know he hasn’t ruled it out but I haven’t heard anyone say, we’re thinking about doing it. </p><p> I would advise strongly against it, it would be a terrible mistake. I would not be supportive of it, I would be critical of it. I don’t believe that any pardon should be used with relation to these particular cases. Frankly, it – not only does it not pass the smell test, I think it undermines the reason why we have presidential pardons in the first place. And I think, in fact, if something like that were to happen, it could trigger a debate about whether the pardon powers should be amended given these circumstances. </p><p> So I hope they don’t do that, it would be a terrible mistake if they did. </p><p> RADDATZ: OK, thanks very much for joining us, Senator Rubio. </p><p> RADDATZ: Up next, how do Democrats plan to respond to the latest filings by the special counsel and federal prosecutors? We’ll talk to one senator who may also be planning 2020 presidential bid, next. </p><p> That was on – that was time, right? Senator Rubio, thanks so much, appreciate it. </p>

    1 December 09, 2018
  •  Pardoning Paul Manafort would be 'terrible mistake': Sen. Marco Rubio

    Pardoning Paul Manafort would be 'terrible mistake': Sen. Marco Rubio

    oned Manafort, Rubio said on “This Week” Sunday. “I really do. I believe it'd be a terrible mistake. Pardons should be used judiciously. They're used for cases with extraordinary circumstances.” </p><p> This reignited speculation Manafort could be angling for a pardon from Trump. </p><p> “I don't believe that any pardons should be used with relation to these particular cases, frankly,” Rubio told Co-Anchor Martha Raddatz. “Not only does it not pass the smell test, I just think it undermines the reason why we have presidential pardons in the first place, and I think, in fact, that if something like that were to happen, it could trigger a debate about whether the pardon powers should be amended given these circumstances, so I hope that they don't do that. It would be a terrible mistake if they did.” </p><p> In a heavily redacted court document filed Friday, in addition to lying about contacts with the White House, the special counsel accused Manafort of lying about his contacts with Konstantin Kilimnik, a longtime business associate of Manafort’s whom the special counsel has identified as a former Russian intelligence officer. The filings also alleged Manafort lied about money laundering, a wire-transfer to a firm that was working for him and "information pertinent to another department of Justice investigation.” </p><p> White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told ABC News in a statement Friday, “The government’s filing in Mr. Manafort’s case says absolutely nothing about the President. It says even less about collusion and is devoted almost entirely to lobbying-related issues. Once again the media is trying to create a story where there isn’t one.” </p><p> This comes more than a week after prosecutors for the special counsel told a judge in a court filing that Manafort had broken his plea agreement by lying to the FBI and the special counsel “on a variety of subject matters, which constitutes breaches of the agreement.” </p><p> Manafort’s legal team disputed that, saying the former campaign manager “believes he has provided truthful information.”</p>

    1 December 09, 2018

Comments

Earn free bitcoin