fairel found. you are going to get $0.12 on the dollar from him but you want her to pay full tilt. one set of rules for city officials, one set of rules for everybody else. bottom line is you have these hearings about a case that happened in 2000. where the hell was the staff for 4 years which was the first document i can see in these records to show you were doing something regarding this. if i campaigned in 2010, and ask for records, the irs only ask you to hold records for 3 years. you are worse than the irs. i agree with mr. bush. for him to have one set of rules for supervisor mark farrell where you are going to impose a few sentence on the dollar and impose maximum, is a real strange set of circumstances. i'm curious as to why the clock isn't running at all. do i have unlimited time? basically i have to agree with mr. pet trellis, this is politics. nothing but short sweet politics. everything said by you and the public is constituted protected political free speech. people arbitrarily coming up with rules. we have a rule in the chamber and you can't do this. if the you violat

i think that goes to the broader point that this is not a policy rich debate. , a fairell covered numberf trump voters voted for his agenda. we did a poll of both clinton and trump voters. were sendingvoters a message of change to washington. you had a mixture of voters that supported his agenda, and others who thought he was not serious about a lot of the things he said. i think a lot of those chickens are coming home to roost. >> a lot of the anecdotal evidence seems to suggest -- there was a rust belt voter quoting the times that said a relative was going to lose health care with the repeal. this one woman said she did not believe he would do it. she got he was bluffing. -- thought he was bluffing. hillary clinton and democratic senate candidates -- every democrat that provide his or her voice said that this guy is a scam. he will shaft working people. why did working-class white people not hear that message? is there a flaw with the democratic agenda? you mention also that a lot of these people were sending a message of just generic change. did democrats not signal clearly enough tha

fairel found. you are going to get $0.12 on the dollar from him but you want her to pay full tilt. one set of rules for city officials, one set of rules for everybody else. bottom line is you have these hearings about a case that happened in 2000. where the hell was the staff for 4 years which was the first document i can see in these records to show you were doing something regarding this. if i campaigned in 2010, and ask for records, the irs only ask you to hold records for 3 years. you are worse than the irs. i agree with mr. bush. for him to have one set of rules for supervisor mark farrell where you are going to impose a few sentence on the dollar and impose maximum, is a real strange set of circumstances. i'm curious as to why the clock isn't running at all. do i have unlimited time? basically i have to agree with mr. pet trellis, this is politics. nothing but short sweet politics. everything said by you and the public is constituted protected political free speech. people arbitrarily coming up with rules. we have a rule in the chamber and you can't do this. if the you violat

fairel found. you are going to get $0.12 on the dollar from him but you want her to pay full tilt. one set of rules for city officials, one set of rules for everybody else. bottom line is you have these hearings about a case that happened in 2000. where the hell was the staff for 4 years which was the first document i can see in these records to show you were doing something regarding this. if i campaigned in 2010, and ask for records, the irs only ask you to hold records for 3 years. you are worse than the irs. i agree with mr. bush. for him to have one set of rules for supervisor mark farrell where you are going to impose a few sentence on the dollar and impose maximum, is a real strange set of circumstances. i'm curious as to why the clock isn't running at all. do i have unlimited time? basically i have to agree with mr. pet trellis, this is politics. nothing but short sweet politics. everything said by you and the public is constituted protected political free speech. people arbitrarily coming up with rules. we have a rule in the chamber and you can't do this. if the you violat

in>> s hgle fairell t offhe he ad. i t wan it. or cganite ma. rial ou>> y n're ot ap.co th dey'tonns arwe to u.yo ou>> yot g it, sero.wood yt an yhingou need. 'm>> i rrsoy. u yowere ngsayi? g >>ood rnmoing, sir. od go te o se you. >> you,s a . well f>>or peeoplho wav hen'tom ce to s the howyet, how do you de bescri e?rosi 'swhatng goi on? >> ie ross i ari pvate olpathtogis t who ueamsph wit a am mieti dveecti tool sveme cris ahe's fun, miopti,stic ttwiy, re spadim optism to evoderyby. >> has hh ealtlechal nges elhimsf? i >>wht's ly he eives dveryay li iske ht lasec bause he sh n'ouldet b rehe. w heoras bn empre,atur had al heth suishees, art is.sues c he danie atny a ntmome. en wh ieveran wt to goreneetiat c myacontrhet, t yy,sa yould cou die. e>> wld coute wri you t.ou t >> iisal cled os"rd.ewoo" y >>ouer nev know noway dsa days. >> th in ire fst onseashe, tre wa ls aot of serowood chest. >> yeah. >> sdiprea ngjoy. >> er i plsonainly le lyikly lhae tt . look ot>> n whing wrongith atth. syou tpokeeo thri wters about th at. >> f the firstourso ep