defy. this is a question that was there in the past but i think a big question is i understand correctly, it is a question included in virtually every major western powers census. they all had variations of this and they all asked the question in germany and britain and ireland. and, the broader issue was the implementation. how do you end up time after time, jumping the shock on the political angle and these political advisors are making arguments that are right on paper or right in principle,
worked on in this next phase. but now they are being told by the judge that their reason for changing the legal team isn t good enough. and another thing bill barr said yesterday is that he and the president were going to move forward and announce the next move on this in the next day or two. here it is the next day and they are facing another setback, trying to figure out even which legal team is making arguments for them. thank you very much katlyn. outfront, gloria borger, harry sand he can, former stft u.s. attorney for the southern district of northern. and april ryan white house correspondent for american urban radio network. obviously a blow to the president s team tonight, harry. what do you think the significance of this decision is. i think the significance is that what the judge seems to be saying is if the government wants to bring in new lawyers and let the old lawyers out, they re going to have to convince him of two things, convince him first that there is a reason f
is there any risk in this strategy for them? not really. and in terms of these particular cases with executive privilege, this white house is making arguments that previous white houses have made, so they have some legal standing here. as long as it s still going through the courts, there s no risk. the risk comes if donald trump one day decides to defy editor of a federal judge, then you would see some repercussions what about hope hicks, annie mcdonald, don mcgahn, they are private citizens right now. is there risk to them when they get held. contempt or sued personally? again, not as long as they are adhering to an executive privilege claim by the white house, unless congress decides to invoke that inherent contempt authority. even if they decided to arrest somebody, they can t arrest the attorney general. he has an armed security detail. but surely they could in theory detain one of these private citizens, and if not do that, fine them. and those fines might not be enforceabl
step? well, we ll still be able to continue making arguments. this was a motion for a preliminary injunction so it was to stop the immediate diversion of funds but we ll still have other arguments to make and the judge asked the parties to coordinate with the briefing schedule and still have claims to make on the merits. it is just that in the meantime money will start to be diverted and continue to be diverted unless or until our arguments are sustained. if the judge rules against you, when will you then file again? a week after that? what s the plan at least on paper for now? well, for now, the parties are trying to decide what the briefing schedule is going to be and the judge has asked the parties to decide, you know, amongst themselves at this juncture when the brief should be due, when the rely will be due and so on and so forth. so that s what s up for right now. we are very hopeful that the judge will see that it s
that exact same issue with respect to trump s accounting firm was litigated this past week and i was in the courtroom watching the judge handle that litigation and by every single account, it looks like the judge is poised to issue an opinion saying that basically they have to produce these financial records complying with the congressional subpoena. i predict based on hearing the arguments of both sides these are going to be the identical arguments made this wednesday and hopefully judge ramos will rule in fair of transparency. so this issue that trump is trying to keep a lid on, very likely going to congress very soon. betsy, put it altogether. could we be talking about the same set of transactions potentially? what does it mean for maxine waters heading up the financial services oversight committee here? it s unclear how much material waters will get and when she ll get it.