Live Breaking News & Updates on Practice statements
Stay updated with breaking news from Practice statements. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
witnesses in this case, he has an argument for ending the gag order, but the judge also has an argument for keeping it in place. >> and let's unpack both of them. number one, the judge maintains jurisdiction over his domain in the courtroom until sentencing and can make the argument i meant that for the quote, unquote the integrity of the proceedings, which was the language in both gag orders. the initial one, and then the amended one. there are still legal proceedings going on and he can maintain whatever he thinks it takes to have the public maintain confidence in the proceedings. now, as a practical matter, number one, there's no jury anymore, which was a big basis for the gag order. and number two, even though there's still the same risk of witness harm, there's no more witnesses in practice, and so just because the judge can it's not clear that the judge will lift it. and frankly, i'm quite curious as to how the judge will thread this needle. >> it's interesting, tim, can you heard trump's team say president biden is not speaking out, calling trump a convicted felon, which he did at this fundraiser. and that's a key reason to end. they say this gag order. do you think that argument is going to hold up?
throw out the case. trump has attacked. of course, just about every judge. he's encountered in his legal battles except this one, aileen cannon, who he happened to a point the former president has frequently praised her in public describing her as smart and highly respected on tuesday, judge cannon ruled a variety of political partisans and constitutional scholars who are not otherwise involved in the case can join the oral arguments in two weeks elliot williams, how normal is this? not normal at all? >> there is literally no reason why the judge needs to have additional folks come in at the oral argument. now, it is a very common practice supreme court does it all the time to have parties outside parties called amicus submitters, right. >> to file briefs on the court that lay out their views and the judge can read them and help them and crafting her pain, but she doesn't need to have this free for all open where multiple parties, no matter how great their scholarship has been, they
defense will try to inject doubt in there. >> how you get around that. do you put people who knew people who were romantically involved with hunter biden on the stand, who will can you asked them what's hunter biden addicted to drugs on that day absolutely. >> that's what they're going to try and do. they knew that timeline was going to be other concern because a lot of what we saw come out in the courtroom yesterday from hunter biden's laptop, which is corroborating his own account in his memoir texts messages there from the day after some of the most critical text messages happen, the day after. so a course, the prosecutors are going to try and use other evidence such as as you said, witness testimony from those who were romantically involved in him with him about his drug use, who knew him at the time. >> you can also see other evidence coming into play. >> okay. that the prosecutors are admitting, for instance, large withdraws, cash. prosecutors are going to stay that that is common practice of those who purchase and take
a very strong headwind that makes it i think very hard to move the race in any direction. >> what i liked about your pieces, it goes into more than just the phrase, double-haters, double-haters is something we've talked around for awhile. but you sort of get deeper than that. i mean, these people really may go nowhere. well, that is so that is an interesting dimension. >> first of all, we've, i think we saw in 2022 a very clear phenomenon where voters biden and democrats, our winning more support then is typical, far more support than is typical among voters who disapprove of his performance, especially those who somewhat disapprove. and that is the answer to people who asked whether anything her trump hurts trump. the fact that biden that the millions of people in polls are saying not only impulse and practice in 22, that they will vote for democrats anyway, even though they believe biden is not doing a good job or they don't have any of the economy that is the measure of discontent with trump. but what i really discovered to it, it says i had not understood
watch it enough today. the conversation that you are having and hearing -- we don't know if they love this country. they say we love you america. they love our border policy under the current president. we have kids on college campuses who said they don't love america. it's interesting to hear it coming from them. thank you, bill. republican senator josh hawley is putting pressure on the biden administration now calling on the dhs secretary mayorkas to end the practice of dismissing thousands of asylum cases effectively giving those border crossers mass amnesty. it comes after a "new york post" report exposed the administration dropped the cases of 350,000 of those border crossers. that essentially allowed them to stay in the country if they didn't have a criminal record or one we could find. in "focus" now senator hawley, republican from missouri, member of the senate judiciary committee. great to see you today. first of all, break down what
the expectation was in my conversations with lawmakers both on the democratic side appreciate the move and others say it goes too far the assumption this was never come something that was put in practice and people would say what we have been saying if this was done through a legislative route you would have a harder time with the court challenges and not to say they wouldn't have come up but when things are done unilaterally out of the white house and you'll seal the legal challenges immediately. that is the expectation i've heard from lawmakers on the hill. some of whom on the democratic side didn't want to be near this and were critical of the white house and those folks allow that this is an issue that democrats need to deal with, need to talk about. it's going to be so central to the way that voters vote and make their decisions in november. >> nbc ali vitaly, thanks so much. the police officers who defended that building behind ali on january 6th are continuing their fight to protect democracy.
and d.a.s, and the doj should get control of it should actively get involved, what does that look like in practice? >> well, katy, i mean, take a step back. why was donald trump convicted in the manhattan courtroom. the answer is because the government had the facts to meet their burden of proof and a jury greed unanimously. saying that you want to prosecute someone, saying that you want revenge, saying that it's our turn now is very different than having a valid investigation with sufficient proof to obtain a conviction of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. at one level, it's just a bunch of some not very smart people saying some not very smart things. on the other hand, there is a danger, right, the weaponization of the criminal justice system, even if it doesn't result in a conviction, right, the mental toll, the financial toll, the being investigated and charged
partners, even his wife. there's a lot of emotional tenor there that can make the jury very sympathetic to him which may cause an acquittal or nullification even during the defense opening apparently, one juror was pretty emotional about it. um, so it's tough situation. they're creating you think there's a high chance of jury still if the cation right here, right. >> tell us what that is and how rare that is. >> so the technical definition for that is when the jury deliberately ignores the evidence or refuses to apply the law because they want to take a stand in the case. that's the theory and practice. no juror gets up and says more refusing following the law here because of a moral stand, it happens behind the scenes because of sympathetic atmospherics what happens then is they start looking for a good way out for themselves and this issue of knowingly may supply that to them. but sympathetic circumstances helped a lot and actually having the first lady of the united states in the courtroom making sympathetic gestures towards his sister the jury is
votes from the reform party and joe biden is done the same thing but he wants to dread demonstrate that he is a master of the game as control of the humanitarian crisis at the border and i'm sure that they're watching the polls to see if this is going to move the needle and more people supporting joe biden becoming term from the border. {aiding people supporting joe biden becoming term from the border.— term from the border. giving me info on to technical— term from the border. giving me info on to technical issues, _ term from the border. giving me info on to technical issues, he _ term from the border. giving me info on to technical issues, he doesn't - on to technical issues, he doesn't control the money, that is congress and say my put them order in placement how effective it would be in practice? he also does apply to unaccompanied minors, is there a risk that exacerbates the problem was yellow very fine month in the policy and joe biden is doing the best he can to try to reassure the liberal left that he is notjust going back to the donald trump policies and were not going to have a ban on muslim immigrants and we
we're talking about cashbackin. not a game. not a game! we're talking about cashbackin. we're talking about cashbackin. we're not talking about practice? no. we're talking about cashbackin. we're talking about cashbackin. we're talking about cashbackin. not a game! we've been talking about practice for too long. -word. -no practice. we're talking about cashbackin. we're talking about cashbackin. i mean, we're not talking about a game! cashback like a pro with chase freedom unlimited. how do you cashback? chase. make more of what's yours.