styer's name mentioned. had my staff received substantive allegations or had he approached me or my staff, we would have attempted to take a statement and interview him. but the alleged victim who also didn't speak to these writers apparently does not recall the incident. that's a point that the "new york times" failed to include in its official coverage. now, it happens that accountability is a cornerstone of democracy. i welcome scrutiny of my work. i frequently refer to reporters, journalists as the police of our democratic system. but today i'm reminded of a very old adage, who will watch the watchman? this week's report includes some embarrassing, irresponsible missteps, mistakes that weren't serious self-reflection. a year ago after the interviews with dozens of people, "the new york times" couldn't even corroborate the allegations laid out by miss ramirez and declined to report on them with nothing but a year of time and another interview with ramirez herself, the paper thought those unverified claims

young getting short changed and i found it very surprising that they admitted that they bumped tom styer up in terms of their top candidates their top tier candidates because he had greater personal wealth and therefore a better chance at the presidency that's totally subjective as we know and we also know that very very wealthy candidates have often fallen short in american elections just look at meg whitman the founder of e-bay she just crashed and burned in california when she ran for statewide office so i think c.n.n. applying that metric was biased and not very smart frankly brian when you think getting short changed. they very well might be but you know the tricky area that we get into what we talk about media coverage and i know this because i'm a part of the media i've been in talk radio for 10 years it's a little bit of a chicken and then they exit you ation is the media not covering the yang gang or andrew yang are they not covering him because the american people just really haven't expressed most interest in andrew young or are the american people not expressing interest in i

and the question is is he able to maintain that and it'll be interesting to see is there it does tom styer for instance and i find his campaign fascinated make the last debate he will be in the next one he has unlimited money he has a huge list behind him a large organizational structure they can put to place in the in the in the early states is he able to go compete with joe biden in his more moderate in the for the democratic party line right now but i would caution anyone who makes too much analysis of a poll in september of 2015 or so to i'm thinking back 4 years ago p.t.s.d. there of 2019 that it probably is irrelevant to what happens when we get to iowa and new hampshire and south carolina nevada and that's really whatever whatever they're going to start to see this race develop more and it's fast and if you look back how many times you had candidates leading and i could quote back over and over again leading at this point in the race i mean hillary clinton is up by about 30 points right now in 2008 and then ultimately falter and are unable to maintain that lead in that so that's i t

and democratic president tom styers is qualified for the debates next month. to make the cut, candidates have to get donations from 130,000 people and get 2% support in four qualifying polls. today a new poll showed him with 2% support in nevada. he will not be in the debate he was allow him to take into the debate next monday. >> owe biden holds a modest lead for the race of the democratic nomination. senators are not far behind him. this as president trump will get another challenger in the republican race. fox news molly mcafee has the latest now on the 2020 presidential race from washington. >> reporter: for thursday night's democratic debate in texas, ten candidates qualified, but ten did not. the chairman of the national committee, tom perez, says democratic voters have taken a look at many of the democrats running for president, "we're reaching a point now where voters are furthering themselves away from them. three of the candidates are pulling ahead. joe biden at the top of the poll at 27%. senator bernie sanders at 19%. elizabeth warren moves up to 1

styer's name mentioned. had my staff received substantive allegations or had he approached me or my staff, we would have attempted to take a statement and interview him. but the alleged victim who also didn't speak to these writers apparently does not recall the incident. that's a point that the "new york times" failed to include in its official coverage. now, it happens that accountability is a cornerstone of democracy. i welcome scrutiny of my work. i frequently refer to reporters, journalists as the police of our democratic system. but today i'm reminded of a very old adage, who will watch the watchman? this week's report includes some embarrassing, irresponsible missteps, mistakes that weren't serious self-reflection. a year ago after the interviews with dozens of people, "the new york times" couldn't even corroborate the allegations laid out by miss ramirez and declined to report on them with nothing but a year of time and another interview with ramirez herself, the paper thought those unverified claims