the ballot or noncitizen or if barack obama or bush and get significant signatures, i would be prohibited under maine law from placing them on the ballot. >> john: she insists, professor turley, she is similarly prohibited from putting donald trump on the ballot because of the prohibitions included in amendment number 14. because of him committing insurrection that he cannot qualify for being president. what do you say? >> jonathan: she's wrong. there's a big difference between saying that you have to be a particular age, which is confirmable, certified based on a birth certificate and the wild interpretation that she has given, section 3 of the 14th amendment. this is an interpretation that has been widely rejected. right now colorado and maine are the outliers, but keep in mind the courts in maine have not reviewed this, it's just her
tried to undo the american constitution republic by any means necessary. >> also, laura, as we laid out the litany of prohibitions that face trump, he's about election interference interference on social media. has it been an hour? >> one of brigitte provisions is not doing anything to obstruct the administration of justice. so not just like harassing a witness or talking to a codefendant. and a query, how broadly the office reads that provision and how strongly the judge is going to enforce that provision within the actual bond world. >> can i ask you don't question? >> there are no dumb questions. >> my understanding and he repeats from tonya track can, something about her picture, she was no good whatever. who, with the profits, where the prosecutors have to file --
but again, -- something >> it's something to note that it's something popular in the republican party. >> i don't think it's particularly politically potent if he's attempting to win back swing voters that he lost in 2020 when he lost an election by 7 million votes and dozens of electoral votes before he tried to undo the american constitutional republic by any means necessary. >> also, laura, as we laid out the litany of prohibitions on face trump, his talk about election interference on social media. i mean, it's not even -- as been an hour? all the >> all the provisions are not doing anything to obstruct the administration of justice. so not just harassing a witness, or talking to a codefendant about the facts. a query, how broadly the district attorney's office leads that provision. and how strongly the judge is going to enforce that provision within the actual bond order? >> can i act can ask a dumb
it's time to be persuasive and say, we believe that it is wrong to rip a baby from its mother's womb. as donald trump said in the second debate. we need to stand firm, life protecting life. late term abortion is something that the vast majority of americans are opposed to, 70% of americans want some sort of prohibitions or limits on abortion. that is a strong position to stand on and we would urge the people on the stage. >> trace: and let me get the pastor to jump in. exact will i right. pastor your thoughts because evangelicals have been fighting for the right to life for a very long time. >> that's right. i'm unashamedly pro life, an niner of penny's and the work she has done. i support president trump because he's the most pro-life president we've ever had. but if we take abortion away from the states and make a national abortion ban there will be some kind of consensus compromise for legislation that
public office and therefore makes trump ineligible to run in 2024. give me your thoughts on this, on this particular analysis, do you agree who is so with this, if so why or why not. how would this disqualification process even work legally speaking if you think it is legally feasible? >> these are the two best scholars in the country. michael stokes post with the university of minnesota for many years, teaching constitutional. law he's a very conservative scholar. a very straightforward, very honest and thorough and a scholarship. -- the history of the 14th amendment, section three, it came out of the civil war, the insurrection that we experienced over four years. there the prohibitions clear. anyone that's given aid or comfort to an insurrection, or participated in an insurrection is barred from public office. there need not be a criminal
hunter biden with such kid gloves. what were the prohibitions that david weiss had in pursuing hunter biden's case outside the realm and geographical location of delaware. there's a lot to ask him. >> john: would you want to know why the sweetheart deal, as many people have been calling it, was written the way it was with the immunity clause in the gun diversion part of the deal as opposed to in the misdemeanor pleas on the irs charges and would you also want to know what role, if any, the attorney general, merrick garland, played in the deal? >> i want to know what the attorney general knew and his participation. he says he's hands off but i highly doubt it. no way with an explosive case like this he was hands off. i doubt that. i want to know about the immunity deal. i went through this under the hillary clinton case, five times
but beyond that, they don't want this trial bringing out evidence in the midst of a political run for office. >> right. his ticket to freedom is getting elected president so he can shut this down. that's the -- that's his only way out of this box. and so that requires delay. it requires a lot of other things to happen, it requires probably a third-party candidate or something like that. but that's his play is to string this out to the point to where in his brain he thinks maybe he can win the election and then he can appoint a new attorney general. in fact, the -- the office of legal counsel of the justice department has twice held over the last half century that sitting presidents can't be tried, they can't be charged and can't go to jail. so that's his play. >> and for the non-lawyers watching, correct me if i'm wrong, but it's not just that it's he can remain a candidate for president -- >> there's no prohibitions --
nations characterizing afghanistan under taliban leadership as the world's most oppressive country for women. you talked about the prohibitions about certain things in american society like work. how difficult is it for them to live here? >> it's incredibly difficult. it's complete legal limbo. right now the women are beneficiaries of humanitarian parole, a very temporary status. they have received some benefits but nothing akin to permanent status in the united states to enable them to have meaningful jobs, including as jennifer said, serving for the u.s. military or contributing to our national security objectives in other kinds of meaningful ways. benefit from other types of social services and most of all, would benefit from the mental well-being of understanding they can now live permanently and their service was appreciated by
up. no different than any other country. >> but it is difficult because following the 1959 revolution, all private enterprise was banned if had cuba. they were required to work for the state. then following the collapse of the soviet union, prohibitions on self-employment began to ease. the first entrepreneurs in a generation face a unique problem. there are no business schools and knowledge that could be passed down by self-employment and they have to learn by doing. one carlos has turned a side business into a restaurant franchise and a small supermarket and logistics company. altogether he employees more than 60 people. attending the business bootcamp, he said, helped him to identify areas of future growth. we've done courses on e-commerce, marketing and risk
one possible mechanism to lay charges someone. one of the reasons the defendants in these cases sometimes don't appear before a grand jury is they exist to decide whether there is probable cause, which in the us the concept. is there a good reason to believe more than just suspicion that there could be a crime? that would be separate to any future trial. mr trump hasn't responded or given evidence as far as he's announced to that in any way. that would mean that any charger indictment, if that were to happen would be based on whether there is probable cause. if that were to drop the indictment, that could drop any time in the next few weeks was that itjust one of his many legal woes, weeks was that itjust one of his many legalwoes, by weeks was that itjust one of his many legal woes, by the way, unlike other cases have the potential depending on what the charges are to kick them out of the white house. it would depend on what those charges are, insurrection would prevent him from running for that because the prohibitions are running for president really never when the founding fathers put together took