. >> the f.e.c. has ruled on more than one occasion that these types of contributions are not necessarily illegal. and so -- and not necessarily have to be disclosed. and so, for example, you take the edwards case. the f.e.c., when they looked at the edwards case, did not have any charges brought against edwards. now, the district -- the local attorneys did. they brought it -- federal attorney did, but the f.e.c. didn't. so i think you can actually look at that case and say, you know what, i don't have to disclose this because the f.e.c. said it's not a problem. >> that's exactly backwards. that is exactly backwards. i mean, people love to try to bring up the edwards case. he was indict and had went to trial and won. this isn't a question of legally not being charged. >> let him respond. >> the f.e.c. didn't prosecute the case. you know that. >> shan, go ahead. >> the f.e.c. didn't prosecute the case. the justice department prosecuted the case. we're talking about crimes here. >> the f.e.c. said it wa

the f.e.c., if you look at what the justice department should have done, which is to look to the f.e.c. and see whether the f.e.c. interprets that as a crime, which they did not. and went ahead and went after john edwards anyway. if you look at what they're supposed to do, they're supposed to look to the agency whose job it is to enforce the law and they didn't do that. >> all right. i have to get a break in. we're going to continue the conversation when we come back. later ronan farrow who has done some of the best reporting on the practice known as catch and kill by the national enquirer, we'll talk to him about the latest developments. tonight more on the symbiotic relation between donald trump and david pecker, how each benefited from the other. plus the inauguration investigation, what the feds want know and why it could become another headache for the president. this is big! t-mobile is offering the awesome iphone xr, with an unlimited plan, for just $40 bucks a month. unlimited. with the new iphone xr?! yeah! iphone xr included. for $40 bucks?! that is big. be right back. with m

jail for a number of other things ok so now he's done something illegal it's a carrying error on the f.e.c. forms it should have been reported i suppose but maybe not mr obama had the same problem that he paid. reverend jeremiah wright to not be involved in the campaign to go it's the same kind of condition. obama was fine there is campaign i should say was find an enormous amount of money as trump's campaign ought to be fined as well if this is actually a technical violation of the f.e.c. so when you say trump instructed his lawyers to do something illegal and that's illegal well ok i mean it's a hypertechnical reading of the f.e.c. law he instructed him to jaywalk and he jaywalked and therefore that's a high crime in this to mean or i don't think so secondly the southern district of new york cannot cannot indict a sitting president this is not just tradition this is also precedent to d.o.j. and. so he's not going to be indicted that's what impeachment is that's a fancy word for indictment but proper a document of the president of want us to comments by the u.s. house of representatives a

trevor potter, president of the nonpartisan campaign legal center, a former republican chair of the f.e.csir. >> thank you. good to be here. >> merry christmas in advance. >>> okay. so, under these facts as you understand them, exposure for the president? >> i think clear down the line legal exposure. you and i both know the justice department has a current policy that it would not indict a sitting president. so he is basically in the situation that richard nixon was in watergate of being an unindicted participate in all of this. what they called then a coconspirator. >> he is individual one. >> he is individual one. and according to cohen's testimony, he directed what cohen did. >> and a.m.i., the parent company, and david pecker, his friend, seems to suggest the same. they also have allen weisselberg, the cfo who was involved in this. he's been cooperating. who knows what he's been saying? the push back from the president's attorneys? >> well, today's big news is the a.m.i. because we read this in the press. it had not been confirmed by the prosecutors. and the importance of that is the

it's the f.e.c. the f.e.c. ruled no violation of the campaign finance law. the justice department prosecuted anyway. they were embarrassed. >> the judge said if it was to help the campaign it was illegal. you're right the jury did not convict john edwards. >> no. >> the evidence in this case is different. >> wrong, wrong, wrong. it has to be for the sole purpose. if there's another purpose it's not a campaign contribution. if there's a personal purpose -- suppose he tried to use campaign funds to pay stormy daniels. it wouldn't be illegal. if it's not a campaign expense, it can't be a campaign contribution. >> the corporation contribution from ami would be clearly illegal. >> no, it would not be. it's not a contribution. if it's intended for a purpose in addition to the campaign purpose -- in the case of hunter, the payment of $1.1 million was intended to shut her up and avoid embarrassment with his wife and children. which is worse? the campaign problem or the wife and children? >> that's that case. let's talk about the president's came. >> same thing. >> n

committee and the presiding committee since the f.e.c. thousands of basically everyone who has offered their support constructive criticism their ideas and their commitment thank you thank you before i look for in the friends i talk to most of all the research so i had to give you. these donations affairs and then they also lowered to just two thousand and it was let's get down to. that took quite a while to get used to where's the money and i'm so going nowhere where does it say future was no way i. didn't talk about the values. so as a security just said let's get down to business too but that's how it started just typical america cannot get down to business dry as thank you were vote . doesn't work that's all but it. really what it was about the time on the c.d.u. is that it's not so new and. oh yeah the money lie. saying that we've never recovered and there is a donation interest. and this is why i want to say with all do you seriously just isn't the times we find ourselves in today challenging without a doubt the facts but i country f

it would also give the f.e.c. more power to regulate america's speech about important issues and many public officials. so get ready to hear a lot of lofty rhetoric about restoring democracy from the democratic leader in the house and her allies here in the senate, but underneath the rhetoric, underneath the rhetoric, get ready for legislation that would do more to undermine our constitutional freedoms and chill their exercise than any other bill i can think of in recent memory. so, madam president, let's not walk down this road. let's not chill americans' exercise of the first amendment. let's defend these freedoms today and stay vigilant tomorrow. the vote scheduled for 11:30 a.m. this morning occur at 11:00 this morning. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved, morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the following nom

and the f.e.c. to investigate whether other covert russian sources may be behind political contributions the n.r.a. has made during the 2018 electoral cycle to any house or senate candidate. we need to know who's contributing millions of dollars to influence the political system right now. in our democracy, the size of your wallet should not determine the power of your voice. i urge my colleagues to listen to the american people who have been loud and clear. they want disclosure. they want to reduce special interest in our politics and they want this government to work for them. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. ms. murkowski: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. ms. murkowski: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the privileges of the floor be granted to my military fellow juan ramirez for the remainder of his fellowship through june of 2019. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. murkowski: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, there's been a lot of

f.e.c. crime. but the truth matters. that's all i'm saying, amy. >> i want to make something clear.is an insult to our intelligence, to the american people's intelligence to think we didn't know this kind of stuff went on. i mean, remember, the democrats owed the road to donald trump -- first it was treason with michael flynn, then collusion, now we're down to campaign finance. it's desperation, it wreaks of desperation. what the american people want is for washington to work for us. >> it's not democrats. i'm sorry, amy. it's not democrats doing this. this is prosecutors lying staff, prosecutors bringing this and democrats are talking about it and republicans are scared of it. >> i'm not afraid of it, van. van, the thing of it is, why don't we get a special prosecutor to look into the fake russian dossier and the campaign finance violations -- >> they did look at it. they didn't see it as anything worth investigating. they did this. this is all a distraction. but look, amy, your voice is always welcome. van -- >> thank you, chris. you're going to have me back to talk about ivanka's