Stay updated with breaking news from Implicates trump. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
in office. one of them was to overturn the electoral key swing states. and replaced -- with slates of fake electors who falsely say that joe biden lost the election. >> and let's pick up on that point about eastman. the hearing so far have placed intense focus on associates just like him. he's the attorney for those who drafted the plan for mike pence to overturn the election, he privately conceded, we find out. privately conceded that his plan was illegal. have you seen any compelling evidence, however, that people beyond eastman or that evidence that essentially directly implicates donald trump himself and not just his associates? >> we heard evidence the other day that trump was in the room when john eastman admitted that his plan violated the law. that's about the closest that we've come so far. but of course, we have unexplored we're going to hear this week which is these efforts to other states and you
big state retirement funds across the country. investment funds that retirees on fixed income have their money and so we are really talking about something that implicates or involves every american. >> absolutely. today's inflation really starts with esg. because if you think about why gasoline prices are so high, a lot of it is a supply issue and the reason we don't have enough supply in this country, one reason why is we don't have enough capital going into oil and gas projects. so in 2015 there were 59 funds raised globally among institutional investors. $46.6 billion was raised. six years later in 2021, 11 funds were raised. $4.6 billion. a drop of over 90% in the face of improving economics and oil and gas. the only explanation that makes sense is esg. people have decided that they do
big state retirement fundsun across the country, investment funds that retirees on fixed income have their moneyin. and so we're really talking about something that implicates or involves every american they know it or not. >> oh , absolutely. and in fact,t, today's inflation really starts with the fauci because if you think about where why gasoline prices are so high, a lot of it is a a supply issuend and the reasonc that we don't haveou enough w supply in this country, one reason why is that we don'tp have enough capital going in to oil and gas projects. so in 2015 there were fifty nine funds raised globallye 59 among institutional investors, forty six point six billionut was raised six years later in twenty twenty one eleven the funds were raised four point six dollars billion, a drop of onover 90 percent in the face of improving economics in oil and gas a, the only explanation that has that sense is esg
want answered tonight? i’m stephanie, what questions do you want answered tonight? i'm looking for a very clear _ want answered tonight? i'm looking for a very clear point _ want answered tonight? i'm looking for a very clear point to _ want answered tonight? i'm looking for a very clear point to point - want answered tonight? i'm looking for a very clear point to point from i for a very clear point to point from donald trump on what happened at january 6th. i think the information that they've had in all these interviews will make a very clear picture of his involvement. and that'll be important. i also think some of the other elected officials and potentially other news networks whose personalities have been a part of advising donald trump, hopefully that will come to light as well very clearly. that will come to light as well very clearl . ., ., ., , ., that will come to light as well very clearl . ., ., ., ., ., clearly. ron, what do you want to see? well, _ clearly. ron, what do you want to see? well. i _ clearly. ron, what do you want to see? well, i want— clearly. ron, what do you want to see? well, i want to _ clearly. ron, what do you want to see? well, i want to see - clearly. ron, what do you want to see? well, i want to see a - clearly. ron, what do you want to see? well, i want to see a very i see? well, i want to see a very clear, compelling _ see? well, i want to see a very clear, compelling case. - see? well, i want to see a very clear, compelling case. it's - see? well, i want to see a very i clear, compelling case. it's always a dangerwhen— clear, compelling case. it's always a danger when you _ clear, compelling case. it's always a danger when you have _ clear, compelling case. it's always a danger when you have three - clear, compelling case. it's always- a danger when you have three lawyers on your— a danger when you have three lawyers on your panel. — a danger when you have three lawyers on your panel, christian. _ a danger when you have three lawyers on your panel, christian. this - a danger when you have three lawyers on your panel, christian. this is- on your panel, christian. this is really— on your panel, christian. this is really their— on your panel, christian. this is really their opening _ on your panel, christian. this is really their opening statement, j on your panel, christian. this is. really their opening statement, if you will, — really their opening statement, if you will, of— really their opening statement, if you will, of what _ really their opening statement, if you will, of what they've - really their opening statement, if you will, of what they've been - really their opening statement, if i you will, of what they've been doing for the _ you will, of what they've been doing for the last— you will, of what they've been doing for the last year, _ you will, of what they've been doing for the last year, the _ for the last year, the testimony that they've _ for the last year, the testimony that they've had, _ for the last year, the testimony that they've had, and _ for the last year, the testimony that they've had, and how- for the last year, the testimony that they've had, and how thisl that they've had, and how this implicates— that they've had, and how this implicates the _ that they've had, and how this implicates the president - implicates the president potentially _ implicates the president potentially. i'll- implicates the president potentially. i'll remind l implicates the president. potentially. i'll remind your viewers _ potentially. i'll remind your
had epstein originally pled guilty. so they have thousands of pages of documents undoubtedly their investigation has turned up. just putting this case aside for a minute. say somebody was investigated for something and exonerated. could you release all the information? no, you wouldn't. there are privacy rights that could be violated. now, that's not to say if ghislaine comes forward, maxwell comes forward and ghislaine comes forward and implicates somebody new that she hasn't previously and presents solid evidence there, yeah, you could have a case against one of these more famous individuals whose names have come up. until we hear something specific, it is just speculation. >> it's a big question a lot of people have. >> yeah. >> because the big names are a
here and we keep getting breaking news, and a lot of different -- a lot of smoke, right, to piece this together, and there was a lot of pulling out there, which shows, you know, that's it's a real partisan split on what happened on january 6th. you know, my question is, you know, does more of this come out that, quite frank areally implicates so many different people not only in the white house but in the media knew that there was a plan, and they were all in on a plan around january 6th. they were all in on a plan quite frankly to to try to overthrow the unlawful election. you know, does this begin to have more weight among voters? right now it seems that many voters are like, eh, i don't know what's happening here, but i think as more and more of his evidence comes out and more and more people are implicated, do americans really start paying more attention, and do americans really weigh this in their
basically being destroyed. and if they don't use resources to look into this process, it would be a travesty. attack -- garland speech last week, they are not going to stop any level. they are going to look at everybody. a fair way of interpreting her. i will be gets to doing that. >> let me ask you, i've often wrestled with this. you've written in other places about criminal liability that the president is exposed to, in other ways. the new york times investigative piece on his tax records. based on actual documents. implicates some pretty aggressive tax strategies. some even called fraud on his face. there's a criminal investigation, new york district general attorney's office. a criminal investigation of oakland county georgia. about the corrupt attempts. to bully raffensperger into
paid a tech company to infiltrate the servers in the trump tower. later in the white house he conveyed this to the fbi, researchers, a quote from the court papers, to mine internet delta, establish an inference, narrative tying then candidate trump to russia. trump says he was spied upon. this is worse than watergate in the president's view and crime should be punishable by death. how big of a story is this? >> not just the president's view that it was worse than watergate. watergate was a low level break-in to a democratic party office and a coverup from the white house. what we're talking about in the latest court filings confirms what we already known but takes it much further, the spying operation against donald trump wasn't just during the campaign, they were also spying on white house servers, trump tower, while he was president. this information was weaponized by powerful government officials including at the department of justice. this implicates so many people,
their back. but what russia is doing in its denial is actually it's implicates itself each at a higher level for the countries to punish the leaders that are responsible for the acts directly in an international court. i'd note also the ukrainian prosecutor would look for ukraine to remain a defendant and be prosecuting other people at the lower level. all of us have to work really hard with them and with the actors on the ground to develop the strongest evidence to make possible these cases. but they will happen. >> but what's so painful, and the thought of it eventually coming is a hard pill to swallow right now, when these horrors may be continuing. you know, russia's still there. and they still have cities like mariupol cut off from the rest of ukraine. things could be uncovered there that are worse than we've already learned in cities like bucha. so what could be done to stop
and so if vaccines become another political issue that we divide ourselves on as society, that's going to impact covid vaccinations and vaccines as cross the board. we need to tread carefully and make sure the incremental benefit we're getting in terms of additional people vaccinated is going to have enough public health payoff that it's worth the policies we're enacting. right now i think we'll get to 80% based on current policies and the good work of the administration. i don't think we're going to get above 85%. a lot of people who remain unvaccinated probably had covid, so they have some immunity. so we really need too look from a public health standpoint what the marginal gains are from the increments of people that were getting vaccinated for the policies that we're implementing. i'm not saying they're bad policies but they need to be judged very carefully against the longer-term implicates. >> right, so it isn't just punitive, or -- right, thank you so much, dr. gottlieb, i appreciate your time. >> thanks a lot. next, the breaking news, we have new body cam video that has just come out of an officer