the oklahoma justices ruling said the lingering impact of the massacre does not fall within the scope of our state public nuisance statute and they rule the state can continue to profit from tulsa massacre related tourism without compensating survivors. today s dismissal marks an end to the quest to see justice in their life time, something i got to speak to ms. fletcher about last year. what does justice look like to you? well, everything is beautiful and rebuilt and restored. you know, we think it is just time now that we have justice on all of that to where we can live all our life. and that is the reidout . all in with chris hayes starts now. tonight on all in day people are saying to themselves, where we better off four years ago or are we better off now and it wasn t even close. the greatest confidence game ever played. voters believe they were better off during trump s term than biden s. we are not better off today than we were four years ago. toni
chambers hopes this is one step toward politicians actively campaigning for voters behind bars in clark county. you have potential victory is lying in those sales at least for now. i want to i guess is it makes a huge difference night, i step toward voters like elliot carver hall, having their voices heard it felt a little bit of empowerment, a little, just a little bit, a little tiny bit sara marie joins us now from las vegas. so this is the first time these voting booths had been used. how did the process go? it went pretty smoothly, although there were voters who showed up to vote and found out they were actually registered in a different county or in some cases, in a different state which is indication of the education gap that still exist for those who are behind bars. there were dozens of folks who wanted to vote from the jail today and we expect that that s cut number is going to be even larger when we get to the general election in november. this was sort of a
Is that he had to buy because he d signed? yes, because he had a contract, because that s where the law. is the law is the law. and i think it s easy to - imagine you ve got boardrooms full of lawyers and bankers. but actually, that wasn t the case. i you know, there were three of us on the - transaction committee. we did have a stellar team| of litigators and of contract lawyers to help us, and of course, - the management team. but it was pretty - focused, pretty clear. and when we had our contract, that s what we had to do, - because that s what you have to do for the shareholders. . so it was so far away from - what your normal board activity is that it is still.still, i kind of feel i m still. processing it 18 months on, i and i would just be very wary of ever doing business with elon musk. - because? because i don t thinkl he has any high moral values or much integrity. 0k. erm, he s obviously not here to defend himself. i m sure he would say something entirely different, but you
Extremely intense, | as you can imagine. because just to explain, the law in delaware is that he had to buy because he d signed? yes, because he had a contract, because that s where the law. is the law is the law. and i think it s easy to - imagine you ve got boardrooms full of lawyers and bankers. but actually, that wasn t the case. i you know, there were three of us on the - transaction committee. we did have a stellar team| of litigators and of contract lawyers to help us, and of course, - the management team. but it was pretty - focused, pretty clear. and when we had our contract, that s what we had to do, - because that s what you have to do for the shareholders. . so it was so far away from - what your normal board activity is that it is still.still, i kind of feel i m still. processing it 18 months on, i and i would just be very wary of ever doing business with elon musk. - because? because i don t thinkl he has any high moral values or much integrity. 0k. erm, he s obviously no
Perspective, but actually - what it was like was extremely, extremely intense, | as you can imagine. because just to explain, the law in delaware is that he had to buy because he d signed? yes, because he had a contract, because that s where the law. is the law is the law. and i think it s easy to - imagine you ve got boardrooms full of lawyers and bankers. but actually, that wasn t the case. i you know, there were three of us on the - transaction committee. we did have a stellar team| of litigators and of contract lawyers to help us, and of course, - the management team. but it was pretty - focused, pretty clear. and when we had our contract, that s what we had to do, - because that s what you have to do for the shareholders. . so it was so far away from - what your normal board activity is that it is still.still, i kind of feel i m still. processing it 18 months on, i and i would just be very wary of ever doing business with elon musk. - because? because i don t thinkl he has any hig
Never liked 25, 24 and 25. now, animal grandfather oh, my goodness, who who ways that men in your absence their mother. their mother. she stepped in and you know, she had to play the role of mother and father it must have been hard to try to explain to them that you were innocent, not on a technicality. you innocent did they somehow believed that that wasn t the case? no i wouldn t say that most people really don t understand like, how the court system works and how things go. and they were like, you know, more so like most people like they don t get it wrong, like okay, so if they if they re pointing the finger at you then maybe there s something there, you know, like what is you know what i mean and you know, you re trying to
Be interrupted by non state actors under though he may wish it wasn t the case, international law isn t a menu. it comes as a package and we cannot pick and choose which bits we want to hold and which bits we want to ignore so the prime minister is unable to see how ignoring egregious breaches in gaza while purporting to act in defence of it in yemen actually undermines international law and a rules based order? israei law and a rules -based order? israel has the right law and a rules -based order? israel has the right to law and a rules -based order? israel has the right to act law and a rules -based order? israel has the right to act in law and a rules based order? israel has the right to act in self defence against hamas, which conducted a terrorist attack on them and we continue to call for international humanitarian law to be respected and for civilians to be protected in that conflict. that conflict. thank you, mr speaker- that conflict. thank you, mr speaker- i th
Seaker, least in the maritime space. mr speaker, my honourable friend makes a very good point about the interconnectedness of the world. the instability that we see whether it is in the red sea or indeed the illegal war conducted in ukraine by russia has had a direct impact on the economic security of the british people here at home and that is why it is right that we invest in defence, protect people and that is why i know he will continue to engage in dialogue with the defence secretary about how best to deploy that investment to make sure that we have the capabilities that we need. we have already done an hour and it looks we have already done an hour and it looks to we have already done an hour and it looks to me we have already done an hour and it looks to me as if there is still a considerable number of people want to get considerable number of people want to get into considerable number of people want to get into please can i ask you to focus to get into please can i a
Asked if his former could speak, the judge allowed it and not surprisingly trump went on a bit of a rant, attacking the district attorney, attacking the judge, attacking the entire process. as you noted, our colleague kara scannell was in court today. this was a little bit of a surprise but it wasn t really a surprise that trump got the final word, right? right. it wasn t supposed to happen, but with this trial a lot of things happen that we don t see coming. the reason why the judge let trump speak is the he said initially from had the most to lose in this case. his business in new york is on the line, he could face a fine or discouragement of $370 million, so really a significant amount of money. so the judge let him speak. he gave him about a five minutes, he had a hard stop at 1:00 for lunch, and that is the reason why judge cut him off. trump was speaking pretty rapidly wanting to make the point he wanted to make, and he did go beyond just the facts the case, attacking the n
Trump derangement cyst syndrome, there s no question about laetitia james, the corrupt attorney general of new york. we ve proven our case, there is not one witness against us other than one person who is a deranged he s got a lot of problems. he s been a man who s been convicted of lying, he s a felon, a convicted felon. and not a good person. but that s their only witness, and he is now crashed and burned. they have no witnesses. and by the way, that witness took back everything he said. in court. he took it all back. so they have no case, it s a shame that a thing like this is able to happen. businesses leave new york, if you went after exxon and they decided to move to texas, and hundreds of millions of dollars they paid in taxes. i ve paid over $300 million of taxes over the last number of years, 300 million. and they don t recognize that. they don t recognize anything. think of it, not one witness,