. >> mr. starr, i believe it's "af right" in pdr as accessory use. >> only as a microbusiness perm. >> councillors, do you need mor? >> in some of them, for instance pdr district on page 18, are ped with conditions. there are other areas where rets permitted, but cannabis is not d out specifically. just going it take us more timel it down. >> we are other items onts agen. last one is one i think -- i hos wide support here. affordability. >> portability. >> we're going to be discussing portability at the rules commit. it's in the police code versus . the land use designation once is permitted and you've gone throud the designation is permitted the planning commission and all the appropriate bodies, that cannote removed, it could be considered. the permit to operate the businn be assigned to the business. we can move the business and tht particular space, we could requt space to have to go through thes all over again for a new busine. then we'd ask for what reasons e permitee had to move. was it becau

>> mr. starr is standing up so we can explain that. >> can you explain what that would entail and mean as it relates to whether or not there is the ability to add adult use and then also what that means in terms of the process? >> so currently as the law is written, all changes of use from a medical cannabis dispensary to a retailer located in districts require the 30 day notification mailed out to neighbors within 150 feet of the subject site. neighbors have an opportunity to file a discretionary view to take it to the planning commission. that's how it's written. what supervisor tang is proposing is to have a mandatory discretionary review for that change of notice. the notice would go out but it would go to the planning commission automatically like currently when you do an mcd and the commission would decide if there is an exceptional extraordinary circumstances to deny or modify the project. >> are there any mcd notice corridors now? >> there may be one coming shortly. >> they don't -- i gues

mr. starr. >> accessory uses are something that is accessory to a primary use necessary for the operation. the way we were thinking of accessories for cannabis is a corner grocery store could have a small amount of cannabis products behind the counter, prepackaged and things like that.j unfortunately, because you can't sell alcohol and cannabis and with a tobacco at the same place -- and tobacco at the same place, it's bookmarked to be determined later. a microbusiness is a primary use. it's more like a microbrewery. microbreweries are allowed to make their own beer, have a tasting room and distribute it all by themselves. it's similar tie microbusiness. they'll grow their own cannabis and manufacturer it from their own cannabis and sell their on cannabis. i think they're limited to 10,000 square 10,000 square feet of can canopy. so they're limited in what they can do from seed to sale for cannabis. >> thank you for that clarification. i think it's important and ties in with the comments made e

>>supervisor peskin: yeah, just to mr. starr, the gray areas wi areas are the exclusions? >> that's correct, so the gray areas indicate a buffer either around a school or the child care. >>supervisor peskin: and then, go to the other one. >> that's just schools. >>supervisor peskin: okay. >> at 600 feet. >>president breed: supervisor ronen? >>supervisor ronen: yeah, i just wanted to add a couple things. you know, i didn't want to get into the big philosophical conversation yet, but i think by expanding the limits around schools and daycare centers, what we're saying is that there's something inherently dangerous or bad about these shops, and i just -- i just really disagree with that premise. i actually think that the war on drugs has been what has been dangerous for our society. there's documented evidence, plenty of it, showing that where you make drugs legal and regulate them and prevent kids from getting access to them and allow people who are already addicted to substances, you know, to not penalize those individuals, that they use less drugs and get better, and that

. >> and mr. starr or commissioned you, please, talk to how this is with the orbiting proposal thate brainchild of the planning comm. >> this would be a replacement e orbit. the orbit originally was a replt of the original proposal which e per 300-foot. then we were at the orbit. so i guess we're proposing goino one per 600 instead of 300. >> okay. feel free to ask questions, com, supervisor breed, do you have ay questions? supervisor sheehy? do you have questions or do youo speak to your section 190 stuff? >> supervisor sheehy: i was goio speak to my section 190. all this does is allow existings and grandfathered mcds to be reo function january 1. i still believe, i mean to be ao adult use, people are going to e getting cannabis. you know. i mean i don't know what we cans going to happen on january 1, be have plenty of product o in th t now. it disturbs me that our processd leave us in the situation wheree foster the black market which ww exists. we don't bring this into daylig. i mean, honestly, one o

. >> mr. starr, you get the last word. is the president getting close to the line?>> no, he's just spouting off. but until he does, exactly what preet said, until he issues a directive. directly or indirectly. he's expressing the frustration. it's not crossing the line. into criminality. >> thank you all very much. >> thank you. >>> coming up, our "roundtable" takes on the fallout. and we'll check in live on the asia trip with jonathan karl. asia trip with jonathan karl. how much money do you think you'll need in retirement? then we found out how many years that money would last them. how long do you think we'll keep -- oooooohhh! you stopped! you're gonna leave me back here at year 9? how did this happen? it turned out, a lot of people fell short, of even the average length of retirement. we have to think about not when we expect to live to, but when we could live to. let's plan for income that lasts all our years in retirement. prudential. bring your challenges. i'm joy bauer, and as a nutritionist i know probiotics can often help. try digestive advantage. it is t

like they've been through this with kenneth starr in 1998. mr. trump is going through it right now. i think anybody would have to be worried. no sane person could avoid being a little bit nervous when anyone's talking about that. as to whether there's enough evidence to warrant the investigation, i think we just need to wait and see. >> we know there's a lot of people looking into that for sure. professor, appreciate your time, sir, as always. we'll have more on the clinton speech at 5:30 p.m. we'll see if they answer any questions about this or face them, which would be news in and of itself. thank you, sir. julie? >> thank you. >> a tragic reminder on the dangers that our police officers face every day. manhunt under way after two police officers were killed in two separate states. the latest on the search for suspects, coming up next. plus, democrats continue to slam alabama senate candidate roy moore. as republicans hit a new target, minnesota senator al franken. are the scandals getting too politicized? our panel will debate, next. but on the inside, i feel like chronic, widesp

i think judge starr in mr. miller could tell us all just how long investigations take before they uncover their final findings. there has beenut a legality but we cannot know for sure yet and we should keep an open mind as the facts develop. i think we do know and judge starr alluded to this, we have had some very significant departures from the ethical and civic norms of the executive branch and indeed, our country as a whole. when of the problems with that is the ethic laws in particular lot were predicated on the idea there are certain norms. a lot factors into that. when those are not followed, we suddenly discover how completely vulnerable our system is and so it begins with a president who railed against his rival for being connected to a not-for-profit unionization. you know, i grew with those who say she would've had to resolve that conflict of interest, but again we're talking about a not-for-profit organization. suddenly we have a president retaining an interest in a four-profit organization that is n

i think that judge starr and mr. miller here could tell us all how long investigations take before they uncover their-- reveal their final findings. and so, again, and in legality, we can't know for sure yet and we should keep an open mind as facts are developed. i think what we do know and the judge starr alluded to this, is that we had very significant departures from the ethic and civic norms of our country as a whole. one problem is the ethics laws in particular, but other laws are predicated on the idea that there were certain norms in place so the laws factor in that those are going to be followed. when they're not followed, we discover how completely vulnerable our system is. and so it begins with a president who railed against his rival for being connected to a not-for-profit organization. you know, i agree with those who say she would have had to resolve that conflict of interest, but again, we're talking about a not-for-profit organization. similarly, we have a president retaining an interest in a for-profi

ken starr knows that the president has to give a deposition in the jones case. >> part of the danger for the president lies in what he said under oath to lawyers for paula jones. mrtion having a sexual relationship with monica lewinsky. >> did the president agree with lewinsky to deny their affair under oath? >> if the president, in fact, encouraged this woman to lie under oath or ask someone else to encourage her, that's a crime. >> it's a different order of magnitude than any of the previous charges that the president had to put up with for seven years. >> what the white house is in for is another legal nightmare. >> hey, ho, clinton's got to go. hey, ho, clinton's got to go. >> this was a howl coming up in the media and from republicans. people were horrified after this. it was overpowering. >> i want you to listen to me. i'm going to say this again. i did not have sexual relations with that woman, miss lewinsky. i never told anybody to lie. not a single time. never. these allegations are false, and i need to go back to work for the american people. thank you. [ applause ] >> i think from the very beginning, the people who knew him the best if they were honest

> martha: host of the blaze, michael starr hopkins the democratic -- let me start with you, you are shaking her head at the end of that interview, why? >> to hear mress use words like thuggery, that's a loaded term, i think it's unnecessary. the ball son apologized and i think the president was punching down by going after lavar ball. lavar ball is a character, but he's a civilian. for the president to even engage lavar ball i thought was foolish. and to be honest, when we look at the president, we want the president to show leadership. children are supposed to look to the president, not to lavar ball and his son, the president. i think he is showing a poor example. >> martha: what you think about that? initially when i watched this back and forth over the weekend i kind of had the same reaction, why is he going there? wires he going? why is he doing it? the more i looked at it and thought about it, everything is about figuring out a message to young people and he clearly felt that the message that was going out from lavar ball, the father of these basketball players, was the wrong message, and he wanted to make very clear that he felt differently

mr. clinton's actions, had they happened in the current era, should have compelled him to resign. a walk-back. and former senior adviser to hillary clinton philippe ryans tweeted this. ken starr spent $20 million on a consensual blank. he kept potus kjc. but not enough for you, senator gillibrand. over 20 years you took the clinton's endorsement money and seat. hypocrite. >> i'm glad to see senator gillibrand get woke on this issue as did jake tapper on the clinton accusers at did the atlantic and "the new york times" and chelsea handler. the atlantic wrote feminists saved the 42nd president in the 90s. they were on the long side of history.is it time to make things right? >> if we don't keep talking about it, we're going to -- >> no. >> i want to but let's take this commercial break. >> it got heated right before that commercial break. and then during the break. so let's continue on. senator gillibrand of new york has said -- of course, there's people that have softened a little bit -- that she thought that if bill clinton behaved the way he did in the white house, he should have resigned. originally she said he should have quit. you were about to make a comment. ladies, you

starr investigation during the clinton investigation. he's currently a senior fellow at the r street institute which is a you this think tank in washington, d.c. mr. rosensweig, i appreciate your time tonight. thank you for being here. >> thank you very much for having me. >> i'm not an expert in these matters. i'm just an agoing lay observer of these sorts of things. the justice department demanding documents from itself to me feels strange. feels like something i haven't seen before. is this an unusual move? >> it's both unusual and not. the not portion is of course, mueller is going to want to get all of the documentary evidence relating to anything he's investigating and in this instance the issue at hand is potential obstruction of justice charges relating to the dismissal of director comey. so naturally he's going to want the documents. what makes this odd is that even though de facto he is independent of the department of justice he is, as you pointed out, de jure under law a part of the department. so this is like a subordinate demanding documents from his superior officer. it's one of the reasons why we have an independent counsel law, t