and i did nothing wrong. live now to our correspondent gary 0 donoghue, who is outside the courthouse in washington. there are three jurists, gary, there are threejurists, gary, on this panel. the longest serving is the judge this panel. the longest serving is thejudge karen henderson. what she says or what she said this afternoon will be taken as a signal and she seemed, what i saw, to be quite sceptical that donald trump was acting within his remit.- sceptical that donald trump was acting within his remit. yes, and the tone of— acting within his remit. yes, and the tone of the _ acting within his remit. yes, and the tone of the question, - acting within his remit. yes, and . the tone of the question, generally, from thosejudges was, the tone of the question, generally, from those judges was, look, the tone of the question, generally, from thosejudges was, look, you know, what you're asking for would lead to some extraordinary situations, potentially. hypothetical, yes, but potentially real situations. a lot of them were asking, look, if you get this kind of brody immunity, a president would be able to —— broad immunity. avoid
to the result of that election, within his remit as commander in chief? his lawyers say, "yes, it was." six days out from the iowa caucuses, donald trump decided he would sit in on these argument today. he was not obliged to be there. but in the view of his campaign team, and on the evidence of previous court appearances, it would seem these legal challenges are hugely beneficial to his relection bid. here's he is speaking after the hearing. i think they feel this is the way they're going to try and win, and that's not the way it goes. it'll be bedlam in the country, it's a very bad thing, it's a very bad precedent. as we said, it's the opening of a pandora's box and that's a very, a very sad thing that's happened with this whole situation. when they talk about threat to democracy, that's your real threat to democracy, and ifeel that as a president, you have to have immunity, very simple. and if you don't, there is an example — if this case were lost on immunity,
the issue with unhcr is that they say that they're the ones with the mandate to protect refugees but they are just playing second fiddle to whatever the host country is saying. that's not what we need for the unh — for the un refugee protection agency. we need an agency that says, "we stand for the protection of refugees "and if we cannot fulfil our mandate, then we will leave." we asked unhcr's deputy director in asia and the pacific, ellen hansen, whether her organisation is fulfilling its remit to protect refugees. it's sometimes challenging to meet what might be legitimate expectations of refugees and, you know, frankly, funding has been reducing steadily for the last three years. so, i think it's a wake—up call for us. it's also a wake—up call for the international community about this extremely vulnerable population which is, you know, really struggling.
another one called him an effing idiot to me. you know, they really didn't like mohib. unhcr has an explicit remit to protect refugees and it asks donor governments to provide $32 million a year in order to fund its protection programme. i had a conversation with unhcr after mohib�*s murder where i said, "you know, this is going to have a chilling "effect on human rights activists "within the rohingya community, "that mohib had these protection risks "that went unmet." and the unhcr protection person said to me, point blank, "well, if speaking out on these issues causes protection risks, "then they should stop speaking out about these issues." the gang most often accused of committing violence in the camps is the arakan rohingya salvation army, better known as arsa.
the issue with unhcr is that they say that they're the ones with the mandate to protect refugees but they are just playing second fiddle to whatever the host country is saying. that's not what we need for the unh — for the un refugee protection agency. we need an agency that says, "we stand for the protection of refugees "and if we cannot fulfil our mandate, then we will leave." we asked unhcr's deputy director in asia and the pacific, ellen hansen, whether her organisation is fulfilling its remit to protect refugees. it's sometimes challenging to meet what might be legitimate expectations of refugees and, you know, frankly, funding has been reducing steadily for the last three years. so, i think it's a wake—up call for us. it's also a wake—up call for the international community about this extremely vulnerable population which is, you know, really struggling.
another one called him an effing idiot to me. you know, they really didn't like mohib. unhcr has an explicit remit to protect refugees and it asks donor governments to provide $32 million a year in order to fund its protection programme. i had a conversation with unhcr after mohib�*s murder where i said, "you know, this is going to have a chilling "effect on human rights activists "within the rohingya community, "that mohib had these protection risks "that went unmet." and the unhcr protection person said to me, point blank, "well, if speaking out on these issues causes protection risks, "then they should stop speaking out about these issues."
by the royal year broadcast 2a times within that ten day period. within that ten—day period. they were also shown at the same times on the bbc parliament channel, and karen smith had this reaction. why was it necessary to show the same annual review programmes so many times on your news channels in favour of other news that was going on at home and around the world? and to make matters worse, to show them on two channels at the same time. yes, reviews are fun and i sometimes needed to look back on to learn. but surely having a review on your news channel and showing all the news at the same time on the parliament channel wouldn't be too far outside your remit, and one would think there wasn't anything else going on around the world. finally, we have the story of the sad case of the disappearing christmas tree. there had been a tree in the bbc news studio. in the bbc news studio up to and including this monday new year's day. but some eagle—eyed viewers spotted that from the following day, the 2nd ofjanuary, it was gone, and julie taylor was not happy.
who is looking at substantial criminal activity allegedly. >> and evidence of it. >> in her jurisdiction in fulton county georgia. she was elected by the people of fulton county to prosecute crimes that happened there. this was according to her a very significant one and that is certainly within her remit. >> thanks one and all for being here. juster ahead, another important story we have following. u.s. military officials giving their first comments about what may have caused that plane crash that appears to have killed putin ally turned rival yevgeny prigozhin. and analysis of that. plus putin's remarks about prigozhin, next.