Page 143 - Binding News Today

Age 4 and under. >> theres this -- the language from orren hatch is interesting. hes someone who said the president has the potential to be the greatest president we have. like every republican, including jeff fke, basically moved lock step with him from a policy perspective. theres been a question all along about what the binding constraints on this presidency are and whether the institutions of american civil society and rule of law will hold in the face of someone who manifestly has no care f...

>> i practice criminal defense. this is going to be a constitutional law. and i say that because we have some precedent, although its not legally binding. its out of the 2nd and 9th circuit. in those cases, the circuit courts have found that its unconstitutional under immediate scrutiny. that is what i anticipate would happen with this case. >> i want to play a little bit of what the governor had to say at the signing. >> smart, comprehensive and common sense gun safety laws will do much more to...

Hes the author of "nuclear showdown, north korea takes on the world." let me start with you. did you see anything from kim jong-un that this time north korea is actually g to keep its promises and deliver? >> no. i cant say that from the summit meeting there was any sign of that. we just haveo hope as mr. trump is hoping upon hope that kim will, quote,o something different, and wish for his people the best. the meeting was aspirational. the joint statement by the two leaders, aspirational with a...

Ainsley? jillian: thanks so much, jillian. president trump signing his name next to kim jong uns name in that comprehensive document right there following the historic summit. steve: but, without congress involved, how much significance does it hold? is it legal? lets talk to fox news senior judicial analyst andrew napolitano. okay. so the two world leaders signed it. >> right. steve: is it legally binding? >> no, its not. its what we call an executive agreement. so kim jong un or the people tha...

Korea. they will undercut the rationale for ou troop presence in south korea. because theres no war. why do we need our troops in south korea? so what im of is not that peace treatys bad. of course formally ending the war is good. its historic. but what if we end the w a north korea does not give up nuclear weapons program? because thats probably whats going to happen. so weve just ended the war, leaving south korea still under threat under their nucar weapons, and north koreas nuclear weapons, ...

Through it, but the pages were soaked together. >> the front and back cover were soggy to the point where when i started to look through it the first time, the pages were still sticking together. >> reporter: days later, he could separate pages, but frustrated. >> the third time. i was thinking, this would be the last time. if i dont find something now, im going lick my thumb and forefinger and went through it page by page. >> reporter: the third time was the charm. >> stuck in the binding of th...

Proceeding. there is also a secondary issue here about a non-disclosure agreement mccabe signed with the f.b.i. his lawyer says hey, you need to settle this with the f.b.i. whets nisclosure agreement is binding or not. chairman grassley says that these are legal non-disclosure agreements because the federal carve-out for congressional oversight. >> melissa: yeah. i mean grassley goes on to say that, you know, its against federal law for the f.b.i. to muzzle its employees in terms of speaking to ...

Purchases but not everybody a base the local ny oki macquarie controls a company that makes plastic packaging strict rules apply here as well. it was like binding can now put that flavor you know about the food you have beyond that which reveals that the back and go. oh that into a i that was you know finding that bad that i know people will take you to court. the thing can have to be like drugs make your phone with cocaine or its utterly legal to have p.c. to kenya breaking the law all comes at...

Criminal trial, whether you can indict a sitting president, whether he is indictable and whether you can subpoena. theyre different legal concepts. it is probably true he made that statement. existing policy is not binding and written in stone, but it is binding until it is not. one can always be subpoenaed. if not, theres no purpose for a grand jury. >> david, you did go to law school. you have some knowledge about this. back in 1998, rudy guiliani was asked if a president is asked to testify, ...

Remark then we should have no grand juries in this country whatsoever. indictment is a very separate thing and its still an open question although the office of legal counsel has said that a sitting president should not be indicted. opinions are not written in stone and the way that perhaps supreme court precedent may be. binding until its not. it can be rewritten. kenneth starr tried to do so with the clinton investigation and could be written of a focused inquiry and whether or not to indict a...