argument that he declassified documents as president. writing in part this, the record contains no evidence that any of these records were declassified. but even without evidence, the former president continuing to make this claim. in an inteiew, just last night, the fox news host sean hannity claiming he declassified documents by simply thinking about it. it doesn t have to be a process, as i understand it. you know, there s different people said there are different things but as i understand, there doesn t have to be the president. you re the president of the united states, you can declassify by saying it s declassified, by thinking about, it because you re sending it to mar-a-lago or wherever you re sending it. but the headline here is, really none of that matters, right, as the 11th district writes this, in any event, at least for these purposes, the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or r
to it. you believe that. i believe so. and joining me the professor at new york school of law and former manhattan district attorney, and welcome to you both. appreciate you joining us. and by the way, it is the testimony that the attorney general cited, that sparked the initial investigation which i find fascinating. rebecca, when it comes to this lawsuit, it has to be proved fraud by a preponderance of evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt as she would have to in a criminal case. what do you make of it? well, think this is a really strong complaint. it s detailed. it s extensive. it looks like she is relying a great deal on documentary evidence, which is a god send for anybody who is trying to bring a case like this. you know, that said, there are some difficulties in this case. as we ve known from the very
that is a really interesting fact there. and i think we ring go to leave it there. but it s something to keep it in mind when senators go to bed at night and wonder if there should be reforms to the filibuster. thank you so much for being here and starting us off tonight. thank you so much. i m joined by i m joined by melissa murray professor at new york school of law. melissa, can you break down for us the court s reasoning in today s ruling on baker? it s a technical opinion. it doesn t focus at all on the merits of this case, whether the aca is in fact unconstitutional. it focuses on the right of the plaintiffs here, group of individual plaintiffs and a group of states to bring this case in federal court. so the decision was on standing. the idea that federal plaintiffs have to have standing, a true
back to the panel, gina, you were saying. i think where i vote, we vote, we voted in someone s garage, don. i m not making this up. we put our ballots in a cardboard box. i said, what will you do with these votes? where do you take them? does someone pick them up? they have no idea. my own anecdotal experience. i m sure mr. trump is hearing this on the campaign trail. that s part of the system. that s part of the system. that s very different than say ing what donald trump is doing, is more than just a chuckle or a laughable matter, out of all of the statements he s made. this is one that goes to the heart of our democracy. the brennan center at the new york school of law, they did a deep dive on this, they said
i am not making this up. we put our ballots in a cardboard box. i asked the election officers there, i said, what will you do with these votes, where do you take them, does someone pick them up? they had no idea. just my own anecdotal experience, i m sure mr. trump is hearing it on the campaign trail and that s why he wants to be proactive and it is responsible thing for candidate to do. is that the first time i ever voted? must be the first time you ever voted. but let me just state this. what donald trump is doing is more than just a chuckle or a laughable matter because out of all of the statements that he s made this is one that truly goes to the heart of our democracy. listen, the brennan center at the new york school of law, they did a deep dive on this and said it is a 4-ten thousandth of a% to have voter fraud.