CNN’s Van Jones on Wednesday unloaded on Donald Trump’s assertion that former President Barack Obama’s National Security Advisor is guilty of a crime.
Trump made the comment in a New York Times interview, when asked directly whether he thought Susan Rice committed a crime when she requesting the unmasking of people who may have been related to the Trump transition team.
“Do I think? Yes I think,” Trump said in that interview.
During CNN’s “The Messy Truth,” Jones went off on the president’s claim he “thinks” Rice committed a crime.
“With his usual zero facts and no evidence, President Trump today declared that Susan Rice is guilty of a crime,” Jones began. “What crime? didn’t say.”
“Let me say a couple words about Susan Rice,” he continued. “The right wing media wants to burn Susan Rice at the stake for doing her job, that’s it. Susan Rice was our National Security Advisor. To give good advice, you gotta ask good questions.”
The CNN host compared Rice’s routine unmasking with FBI Director James Comey’s pivotal decision last October to reveal that the bureau was looking into new information pertaining former Trump rival Hillary Clinton.
“If she were a terrible person, up to no good, trying to ruin Donald Trump, you know what she would have done, what she could have done?” Come asked. “She could have called a press conference in the middle of the election, like James Comey did from the FBI. She could have run around screaming bloody murder, ‘Look what I found, look what I found!’”
Jones argued Rice deserves the Presidential Medal of Freedom, because “somebody like Comey would have created a firestorm and possibly wrecked his campaign.”
“Republicans should love Susan Rice,” Jones said. “They should thank Susan Rice … Instead, they’re throwing fits. Why? Maybe they don’t want you to think about what Susan Rice unmasked.”
“People on Trump’s team possibly playing footsie with bad guys from Russia,” Jones said. “Let’s not get distracted.”
The CNN host then tore into Trump’s use of son-in-law Jared Kushner to solve the world’s problems.
“[Kushner] has zero qualifications for his job, except that he married Ivanka,” Jones said. “Nobody even knows what his job is. … If Republicans are concerned about the proper function of our government, they should call hearings on Jared and his role, and point to Susan Rice as an example of how to follow protocol.”
Watch the video below, via CNN:
‘Out of his depth’: Trump holding back on Iran because he understands it’s harder than ‘swinging’ at a primary foe
During a discussion on news that Iran has shot down a U.S. drone over international airspace on CNN, New York Times White House correspondent Maggie Haberman explained that Donald Trump is in no rush to respond militarily because, for once, he knows he's "out of his depth."
Speaking with hosts John Berman and Alisyn Camerota, Habermann said that the president will likely get advice from national security adviser John Bolton to push back militarily, but that Trump doesn't seem interested in taking on as large a task as going to war.
"He usually responds to a provocation when it's a smaller thing that he can punch and knock down," Haberman explained. "He's pretty aware he can't actually do that with Iran. So I don't think you're going to see the typical, you know, as if he were swinging back at a primary foe. I think he is going to actually be a little more careful in what he says."
Nightmare scenario: Trump could lose by 5 million votes — but still win re-election by one electoral vote
President Donald Trump could potentially win re-election next year by a single electoral vote.
In that nightmare scenario for Democrats, the president could lose the popular vote -- again -- but still narrowly eke out an electoral win by holding onto four states he carried in 2016, reported Axios.
Even if Democrats flip Michigan and Pennsylvania, increase their vote totals in California and come close to winning Texas -- which could give them 5 million more votes than Trump -- their candidate could still lose if Trump narrowly wins Arizona, Florida, North Carolina and Wisconsin.
Hope Hicks’ latest obstruction just gave the Democrats a major weapon: report
Hope Hicks didn't provide much information for Democrats in her testimony before the House Judiciary Committee -- but she may have cracked the stone wall the White House has built around former staffers.
President Donald Trump's former communications director -- and perhaps his most trusted aide outside his family -- claimed blanket immunity throughout her closed-door testimony, but Hicks still gave Democrats something in their legal battle against the White House, argued Margaret Carlson for The Daily Beast.