Country. That is a question, manu, that cannot be left unsaid, that Kevin Mccarthy went to maralago to Kiss The Ring of the former president. Marjorie Taylor Greene tweeted out a day or so after the meeting that she was on trumps side. Wearing a mask that said free speech, she said she wants to work with everybody about keeping america first, using the language of donald trump, essentially sending a message she expects to survive this. The party still talks badly about her and about the embrace of Conspiracy Theorists or at least not expunging the party of Conspiracy Theorists. A number of Senate Republicans dont like the way republicans handled this last night in which they took action on their own to make clear there is just no room for someone in the party like Marjorie Tyler green. Tom thune told he am morning that a party is, well he had raised caioncerns that the part was focused on qanon, so there is a concern here from a number of republicans about the way forward, and we heard
Whatsoever. They made the argument that it makes sense to try the case and then consider documents. They made no argument that the white make sense to have trial without witnesses are and why, because its indefensible. Its indefensible. No trial in america has ever been conducted like that, and so you would nothing about it. And that should be the most telling thing about councils argument. They had no defense of the mcconnell resolution because there is done. They couldnt defend on the basis of president , they couldnt defend on the base of history, based on the constitution, they couldnt defend at all. So what did they say . First they made the representation that the house is claiming there is a such thing as executive privilege. Thats nonsense. No one here has ever suggested theres no such thing as executive privilege but the interesting thing here is they have never claimed executive privilege. Not once during the house investigation did ever say that a single document was privile
In the house impeachment inquiry. No president in history has ever done anything like this. Many president s have expressed they couldnt do anything like this. President trump did not take these extreme steps to hide evidence of his innocence or to protect the institution of the presidency. As a career Law Enforcement officer, i have never seen anyone take such extreme steps to hide evidence allegedly proving his innocence. And i do not find that here today. The president is engaged in this coverup because he is guilty, and he knows it and he knows that the evidence he is concealing will only further demonstrate his culpability. Notwithstanding this effort to stonewall our inquiry, the house amassed powerful evidence of the president s high crimes and misdemeanors. 17 witnesses, 130 hours of testimony combined with the president s own admission on phonecalls and Public Comments confirmed and corroborated by hundreds of texts, emails and documents. Much of that evidence came from patrio
Republicans are saying there is not sufficient evidence to accuse the president of these actions and this impeachment is a sham. It is not built on firsthand evidence and they have tried to dismiss the process as not worth pursuing. I was talking to sources over the weekend who are working on the committees with regards to impeachment, and theyre working on drafting articles of impeachment as we speak. When will that process conclude and the committee introduce articles of impeachment . We expect to see articles this week. They will probably be voted first in the Judiciary Committee as soon as wednesday and go to the house floor next week. They want to wrap this up before christmas and right now they are on that timeline. Vonnie what are we looking at in terms of articles of impeachment . At least twoa articles, the first will be abuse of power, that the president abused his power and trying to elicit help from a foreign power. The other will be obstruction of congress and pointing out
Of congress for more regulation, especially over concerns of risk of gambling addiction. Should the fedent regulate Online Sports bet something if you say yes regulation is needed if you want to tell us why and to what extent, 2027488000. If you say no, 2027488001. Maybe youre not sure, 2027488002. If you want to give us your thought via text, 2027488003. Facebook is available to facebook. Com cspan and we have a twitter poll as you can participate as well on x. You can at cspanwj. Bets on basketball online saying the total amount of bets on all sports through legal wagering sites in 2023 from the previous year. Thats up from 7. 5 billion. The American Gaming Association estimates that 2. 7 billion will be bet this year on mens and womens sports tournament. Some of those facts from Sports Betting from the United States 38 states, the district of columbia allow some form of Sports Betting. When it comes to the question of regulation there was a recent poll done by s c if more regulation