35 Burst results for "judiciary committee"
FBI chief warns of violent domestic terrorism growing in US
"Director christopher ray bluntly labeled the january riot at the us capitol as domestic terrorism. On tuesday and warned of a rapidly growing threat of homegrown violent extremism that law enforcement is scrambling to confront through thousands of investigations. Ray also defended to lawmakers he's own agencies handling of an intelligence report that warned of the prospect for violence on january six and he firmly rejected false claims advanced by some republicans that trump groups that organized the deadly riots. That began when a violent mob stormed the building. Congress was gathering to set if i results of the presidential election raise testimony before the senate. Judiciary committee is first before congress. Since the insurrection was the latest in a series of hearings centered on the law enforcement response to the capital insurrection. Lawmakers pressed him. Not only about possible intelligence and communication failures ahead of the riot but also about the threat violence from white supremacists militias and other extremists. The fbi says it is prioritizing with the same urgency as the menace of international terrorism organizations. The violence at the capitol made clear that law enforcement agency. That remade itself off to the september eleven. Two thousand one attacks to deal with international terrorism is now laboring to address homegrown violence by white americans. President joe biden's administration has tasked his national intelligence director to work with the fbi and department of homeland security. To address the threat number of white supremacy arrests has almost tripled. He said
FBI Director Condemns Capitol Siege as "Domestic Terrorism"
"FBI director Christopher Wray says the January 6th attack on the U. S. Capitol was an act of domestic terrorism. NPR's Brian Naylor has more on Ray's remarks to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Testifying for the first time since the attack, Director Ray said he was appalled by the violence and destruction of that day that Attack. That siege was criminal behavior, plain and simple. It's behavior that we the FBI viewers domestic terrorism. In Ray's words. Quite a number of the some 280 people who have been arrested on charges relating to the attack had militia or white supremacist connections. And today, he said, there's no evidence that anyone connected to anti fur had been involved. He said that domestic terrorism was metastasizing across the country, and he defended the bureau's sharing of intelligence in the days leading up to the attack, but conceded what happened on January 6th was not an acceptable result. Brian Naylor. NPR
FBI director says Washington, DC assault 'domestic terrorism,' no evidence of Antifa
"Facing a tough round of questioning on Capitol Hill as Congress continues to examine the events that led up to the deadly attack on the U. S Capitol building. Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee questioned Ray about police involvement in riots and in the white supremacist movement, the vast, vast, vast, vast, vast vast majority of the men and women in uniform both in law enforcement and the military. Our brave, selfless, professional, high integrity individuals. But when there are bad apples in the midst, we work with our partners to try to get ahead of it. Federal authorities have arrested numerous off duty police officers and members of the military for taking part in the attack. Several Republicans used today's hearing to question Ray about threats posed by Antifa and other left wing extremist groups. Ray made clear that those groups were not part of the capital riot, which he labeled as domestic terrorism. Retail
FBI Director, Christopher Wray, Testifies Before The Senate
"As Congress continues to examine the events that led up to the deadly attack on the U. S Capitol building. Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee questioned Ray about police involvement in riots and in the white supremacist movement, the vast, vast, vast, vast, vast vast majority of the men and women in uniform both in law enforcement and the military. Our brave, selfless, professional, high integrity individuals. But when there are bad apples in the midst, we work with our partners to try to get ahead of it. Federal authorities have arrested numerous off duty police officers and members of the military for taking part in the attack. Several Republicans used today's hearing to question Ray about threats posed by
FBI director testifies on Capitol attack
"Wray is testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee as lawmakers continue to investigate the violent attack on the U. S. Capitol building in January. In his opening statement, Ray called the riot an act of domestic terrorism that has no place in the nation's democracy. He also updated lawmakers on the investigation. Our greatest partner In this investigation has been the American people themselves. Citizens from around the country have sent us more than 270,000 digital media tips. Some have even taken the painful step. Turning in their friends or their family members. Authorities have charged more than 270 people in connection with the attack. The White House is
FBI chief to face questions about extremism, Capitol riot
"I'm Julie Walker the head of the FBI is set to testify today for the first time since the deadly January sixth right at the capitol and lawmakers are likely to press him on whether the bureau adequately communicated with other law enforcement agencies about the potential for violence that day questions about the FBI's preparations for what took place that day and investigations into it are expected to dominate Chris Wray's appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee he's also likely to be asked of the bureau is confronting the national security threat from white nationalists as domestic violence stream is the violence at the capitol made clear that the F. B. I. which revolutionized itself after the nine eleven attacks to deal with international terrorism is now scrambling to address homegrown violence last week the acting chief of the capitol police said in January fifth report from the FBI warning about concerning online posts made its way to police investigators and the department's intelligence unit but was never sent up the chain of command I'm Julie Walker
Senate Judiciary Committee advances Merrick Garland's nomination
"The Senate Judiciary Committee just advanced Merrick Garland's nomination to be the next attorney general. 15 to 7 vote. Three Republicans joined Democrats to vote Garland through one of them, Senator Lindsey Graham, who notably helped sink Garland's nomination to the U. S. Supreme Court under President
Senate committee advances Merrick Garland's nomination for attorney general
"Biden's pick for attorney general, the Senate Judiciary Committee has voted to advance the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland. The vote was 15 to 7. Garland had been former president Obama's Supreme Court nominee back in 2016. But the vent Republican controlled Senate declined to let his nomination come up for a vote. This time around Garland. He's to be confirmed as attorney general by the full Senate, and a vote could come Later this week,
Senate Judiciary Committee advances Merrick Garland's nomination
"The Senate Judiciary Committee voted today to advance the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to become U. S Attorney general. The committee voted 15 to 7 to approve the president's nominee and the full Senate could vote on his confirmation later this week. Garland had been former president Obama's Supreme Court nominee. But the then Republican controlled Senate declined to let the nomination come up for a vote. This time around. Garland is expected to be confirmed as attorney general by the full
Senate Judiciary Committee advances Merrick Garland's nomination
"Hour of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has voted to advance the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to become the U. S. Attorney general. The committee voted 15 to 7 to approve the president's nominee. The full Senate could vote on his confirmation later this week. Garland had been former president Obama's Supreme Court nominee, but the then Republican controlled Senate declined to let his nomination come up for a vote. This time around. Garland is expected to be confirmed as attorney general by the full Senate.
Witnesses Praise Merrick Garland, Joe Biden's Pick for Attorney General
"Witnesses have been called on the second and final day of confirmation hearings in the Senate for attorney general pick Merrick Garland. One of the witnesses attesting to Garland's character and judgment was interim president and chief executive officer Wayne Henderson. With the leadership conference on civil and human rights, he called Garland uninspired choice. Attorney general must be seen by every member of the public from every community as a fair arbiter of our legal system, whose sole duty is to serve the national interest. Alan was also praised by Republican witness former independent counsel Ken Starr, who spent years investigating Democratic President Bill Clinton. The Senate Judiciary Committee is set to vote on Garland Monday. The full Senate could act
Merrick Garland Finally Gets His Senate Confirmation Hearing
"From Attorney General nominee Merrick Garland, the Judiciary Committee Tuesday we'll hear from outside witnesses. CBS is Kris van Cleave with more on what the federal judge had to say, Well in the hot seat nearly five years after being nominated to the U. S Supreme Court, Merrick Garland finally got his Senate confirmation hearing for attorney general. If confirmed, Garland will oversee prosecutions of hundreds charged in relation to the Capitol attack. This was the most heinous attack on a Democrat on the Democratic process is alive ever seen, he take over a department beset by low morale and under fire from Democrats for decisions made during the Trump administration and from Republicans for its investigation of the Trump administration.
Garland tells senators his first priority will be prosecuting Capitol insurrection
"On the first day of his Senate confirmation hearings, President Biden's nominee for attorney general pledged to repair the relationship between the Justice Department and the White House. MPR's Windsor Johnston reports, Judge Merrick Garland spent a lot of time addressing the deadly insurrection at the U. S. Capitol Building. Speaking before the Senate Judiciary Committee Judge Garland called the attack on the Capitol heinous and something he had never expected to see in his lifetime. Harlan said. If confirmed, he would work closely with prosecutors to bring those responsible to justice. Democrats on the committee urged Garland not to rule out investigation of thunders organizer's or aiders and abettors, who were not present at the Capitol on
Garland confirmation is a stage for 4 of GOP's 2024 hopefuls
"App. Federal Judge Merrick Garland is president Biden's nominee to become attorney general. He testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee today. The hearing lasted most of the day We begin with committee chair Dick Durbin of Illinois. This hearing will come to order today. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to be the 86th attorney general of the United States. Judge Garland I wanna welcome you and your family. I want to welcome you back to the Senate Judiciary Committee. I know this return trip. It's been a long time and planning on you're here. Finally, this will be the Judiciary Committee's first hearing of the 117th Congress. Before I turned to my opening remarks. I'd like to just take a few minutes to make some Acknowledgments. I want to welcome my friend, Senator Chuck Grassley as the committee's ranking member. When I first came on the Senate Judiciary Committee 24 years ago, I was the ranking member on subcommittee with you, and we dealt with the issue of bankruptcy. Now Illinois and Iowa sit next to each other. And so did Urban Grassley. We have our differences. But Senator Grassley and I have worked together on important legislation over the years, most recently on criminal justice and sensing reform. I look forward to continuing that work in this Congress. I want to recognize the outgoing chair and ranking member Senator Lindsey Graham, who will join us remotely this morning, and Senator Dianne Feinstein. Senator Graham, as is true of Senator Grassley. Well, we don't always agree, has always been a welcome partner on many issues. Including one of the most challenging issues, immigration, Senator Feinstein. I want to come in for leading the committee Democrats with Grace and resolved over the past four years. I know she will continue to be an important voice on this committee on a host of issues, including in her new capacity as the chair of the Human Rights and Laws subcommittee, which I was proud to charity and past Congresses. I also want to welcome our new committee members who either be here in person. I see one in person and one probably remote senators Padilla And also on the Democratic side, Senator Cotton on the Republican side. I look forward to working with each of you. There's some historic first in the Judiciary Committee this year, Senator Padilla, our new senator from California, will be chairing the subcommittee on immigration, citizenship. Border safety. I'm honored that he's the first Latino senator to chair that subcommittee, and we look forward to his leadership. Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey will chair the subcommittee on criminal justice and counter terrorism. He's the first Black senator to chair a judiciary subcommittee. And we could not imagine a better choice at the helm of this particular subcommittee to all of our other members who are returning to serve on the committee. Welcome back. I want to thank all the committee members for agreeing to hold this committee hearing and vote on Judge Garland's nomination. It is a great honor to serve on this committee. The Senate established the Judiciary Committee by resolution on December 10th 18 16, making it among the very first standing committees of the Senate. This committee has seen many consequential debates and approved many important nominations and landmark legislation in the committee's history. There has only been one prior Illinois senator to serve his chair Judge Garland Lyman. Trumbull, who led the committee from 18 61 to 18 72, and during his term of service was a Democrat, a Republican, a radical Republican and a Democrat. Again. He was the most bipartisan senator, you could imagine His tenure was also distinguished by passage. Of historic legislation, the 13th 14th and 15th amendments to the Constitution. The Freedman's bureau acts of 18 65 and 18 66 Civil Rights Act of 18 66. The last of these was introduced by Trumbull ultimately became the nation's first civil rights law. As chair, Trumbull saw a nation torn apart by original sin slavery and widespread violence and injustice that continued even after the 13th amendments. Passage is African Americans throughout the nation face race. System. Our nation is still dealing with the consequences of these injustices. People of color face systemic racism, and we're still working to rid this nation of the horrific legacy of slavery and Jim Crow. This committee could make a difference. We have the jurisdiction and the opportunity to do it through legislation, oversight and nominations, including this nomination of Merrick Garland to service our nation's next attorney general. There have been few moments in history where the role of attorney general and the occupant of That post It mattered more Judge Garland should you be confirmed, and I have every confidence you will be. You'll oversee a Justice Department at an existential moment. After four tumultuous years of intrigue, controversy and brute political force, the future of the department is clearly in the hands of the next attorney general Under attorney general Sessions and successor Bill Bar. The Justice Department literally became an arm of the White House committed to advancing the interest. The President Trump his family and his political allies. It came as little surprise then that the U. S Department of Justice became the Trump Department of Justice General Bar stated clearly that he believed the attorney general was the president's lawyer, not the nations. And what were the results too many in the department's senior roles cast aside the rules law trump appointees in the apartment sidelined career public servants from Lyon attorneys, two FBI agents Limited their roles disregarded their nonpartisan input override, overriding their professional judgment and falsely accusing them of being members of the
Merrick Garland vows independence as attorney general at Senate hearing
"On Capitol Hill, President Biden's nominee for attorney general, pledged to re establish the boundaries between the Justice Department and the White House as NPR's winter, Johnson tells us during his Senate confirmation hearing this afternoon, Judge Merrick Garland spent a lot of time addressing the deadly insurrection at the U. S Capitol building last month. Speaking before the Senate Judiciary Committee Judge Garland called the attack on the Capitol heinous and something he had never expected to see in his lifetime, Garland said, If confirmed, he would work closely with prosecutors to bring those responsible to justice. Democrats on the committee urged Garland not to rule out investigation of funders, organizer's or aiders and abettors, who were not present at the Capitol on January 6th MPR's Windsor Johnston. If confirmed by the Senate, Garland will inherit a department rife with political drama and controversial decisions. He's Widely expected to receive bipartisan support for the attorney
'A Death Sentence': US Prisons and COVID-19
"People are some of the most vulnerable took over 19 since March, researchers say more than 1600. People in jails and prisons have died of the disease, and tens of thousands have been infected. Some states have started to vaccinate people behind bars while others have not. And we're gonna look now at how this is playing out in three states. Alison Cherry is with Colorado Public radio and she joins us from Denver. Conrad Wilson is with Oregon Public Broadcasting, and he's in Portland. Joining us from Boston is dead Backer with W. B. You are good to have all three of you here. Hi. Hi. Hello, Dev. I want to start with you. In Massachusetts. Your state included prisoners in the first phase of its covert 19 vaccine plan. What was the rationale for that? Well, we know that the virus transmits quickly in correctional settings in the risk of contracting the virus and dying from it are much higher inside prisons and jails compared with outside. So in deciding to vaccinate prisoners. Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker, a Republican, said that correctional settings are no different from other congregate living situation, such as shelters and group homes where people are living in Copan close quarters and the virus can easily spread. So here's what he said last month when he explained why prisoners were included in the first phase. Our facilities are congregated facilities and we need to make sure that the people who work there and the people who live there because of the possibility of outbreak that that should be a place. We focus early in this exercise. The governor says it's strong public health policy because it's not just vaccinating prisoners. Workers are getting the vaccine to any pointed out. There are lawyers to go in and out of prisons in jail's medical workers, visitors those who provide programming, so the states thinking is that offering vaccines and correctional settings will help prevent the spread in the community. And so far, how is the vaccine rollout going in jails and prisons in Massachusetts officials say it's going smoothly, but it appears that a lot of people are not taking it. Court documents in particular shows that about a third of prisoners in more than half of prison workers have not received the vaccine. Now. That number does not include workers who may have been vaccinated elsewhere. So some correctional facilities are holding vaccine education sessions to encourage people to get the shop. Okay, let's turn now to Oregon More than 40 prison inmates have died after testing positive for covert 19 in that state. So Conrad give us a sense of what's happening with vaccines there now. Almost 7000 inmates have been vaccinated. That's more than half of the state's prison population. Many of those inmates have received their second dose, prison officials say, but vaccinating this many inmates this soon wasn't something Oregon health officials were willing to do on their own. Took litigation from a group of inmates on din order from a federal judge here in Portland. Basically, the inmates argued Oregon's vaccination plan didn't treat them like others living in nursing homes and other congregate care facilities where the vaccine has been administered. Your state representative General Bynum. She's a Democrat and chairs the Oregon House Judiciary Committee. I didn't understand how our adults in custody, we're any different from any other group in a congregant care setting. And I certainly don't believe that a prison sentence is a death sentence. The judge's ruling at the beginning of this month force the state to offer inmates vaccines immediately, So that's why about half of all prison inmates have been vaccinated. Let me jump in here. This is Alison and Denver Advocates here wish that that would have happened in Colorado that court ruling con artist is talking about in Oregon. Is something lawyers here have been trying to use as a tool to get inmates vaccines, and I know there's been a back and forth over this in Colorado. Alison tell us more about what's been happening there. Yeah. Democratic Governor Jared Pulis hasn't prioritized inmates at all. And initially he did in one of the early plans, but then Was called out for that by some prominent conservatives, You know, people saying, Do you want the murderer to get the vaccine before your next door neighbor and he was apparently sensitive to that, and so he removed prisoners from the lists and put them in just the regular population. So in other words, he's making no distinction that these people are in a group setting a 70 year old prisoner would be prioritized. A 70 year old non prisoner and so on. So the majority of prisoners are not being prioritized. I will note that prison staff has been prioritized in those vaccines are being administered now. So tell us more about the pressure that Colorado's governor has been under Well. He's gotten a lot of pushback for his decision to not prioritize inmates for vaccine for getting a vaccine, and he's also been sued. He has thought that lawsuit successfully so far. Rebecca Wallace is an A C l U lawyer, she says. Public health officials have been universal in saying that people in groups heading should be prioritized for a vaccine and governor pull. It has actually not only ignored that guidance but rejected that guidance from his own Colorado Department of Public Health on by think it really stand out because he's such a data driven individual in his other decisions. I'm curious. Early in the pandemic, there was pressure to release inmates to create social distance inside facilities that were often crowded. Have vaccination efforts change those conversations in the states that you're all in? Well in Massachusetts. Despite the early vaccination of prisoners, there has been little movement to release people. The fight over that continues mostly through litigation. There are pending lawsuits, but with so many prisoners getting vaccinated now, it does weaken the argument for big releases. Yeah, and in Colorado. Interestingly, the state's prison population has gone down by a few 1000 people since the start of the pandemic, But state officials attribute that almost 100% to the fact that there were no no criminal jury trials last year at all in 2020, so there's this massive backlog in the States Criminal justice system. So you've brought us three very different stories about policies around vaccinating, incarcerated people in three states that are very different across the country. How does this fit in with what we are seeing across the US nationally, Conrad Well, every state is really dealing with this a little bit differently. And, you know, really, This is another symptom showing a lack of a national strategy. Despite the risks, it's another way of, you know, also showing how inmates are marginalized by society. And this isn't just about those who are incarcerated. In a recent report by the nonpartisan Prison Policy Initiative, researchers found that there were more new cases and counties that have large incarcerated populations.
Merrick Garland pledges to pursue equal justice if confirmed as attorney general
"Confirmation hearings for President Biden's nominee for attorney general are underway this hour on Capitol Hill. NPR's Windsor Johnson reports. Judge Merrick Garland Open his testimony by Pledging to restore integrity within the Justice Department after years of turmoil. In his opening statement, Judge Garland stress that the role of the attorney general is to serve the rule of law and to ensure equal justice under the law. Speaking before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Garland also pledged to combat the resurgence of domestic terrorism and hate crimes. We must do everything in the power of the Justice Department to prevent This kind of interference with the policies of American Democratic institutions, and I plan to do everything in my power to ensure that we are protected, Arlen says. If confirmed, he would supervise the prosecution of white supremacists and others who stormed the capital building on January 6th, calling the riot a heinous attack. Windsor
Attorney General Nominee Merrick Garland Senate Confirmation Hearing
"Before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Judge Merrick Garland has a long history with the Justice Department, and he led the federal investigation into the Oklahoma City bombing. In his opening statement, Garland told senators he has prepared to address domestic extremism in the U. S. If confirmed. Will supervise the prosecution of white supremacists and others. Who stormed the capital on January 6th. Heinous attack that sought to disrupt a cornerstone of our democracy. Peaceful transfer of power toe. A newly elected government senators are expected to ask him a serious of questions on issues from civil rights to an investigation of President Biden, son. Nearly 44 million people in the U. S. Have received at least one
"judiciary committee" Discussed on Amicus with Dahlia Lithwick
"Is that a problem? Is there a way to frame that question where you don't pull back a bloody stump? Difficult for me to answer that question because I don't know who you're talking about. Exactly right like I like Efraim it in a way that you won't get hit. On bigotry charges by WHO right both sides. But I mean Dianne Feinstein got shellacked by on the left and the right for a religious test and for inappropriately probing in Coney Barrett's writing. So I just I'm trying I guess what I'm asking is the hypothetical is, is there any way to ask a judge who has written that? Of course, religion affects my judging does religion affect your job but I think you ask it exactly that way like I. To, answer it wasn. Yes. Of course, there is a way to do that. No matter how you do that there will be bad faith people on the Republican side who accuse you I mean no pun intended but there will be bad faith people who accuse you of acting in bad faith and no matter how you frame it there will be cowardly chicken liver liberals. We're like, no matter what you do. You're going to get that from both sides because the Republicans act in bad faith and the Liberals Act with cowardice. So it's impossible to frame it in a way that appeases both of those extreme wings but in terms of kind of being able to sleep with yourself at night knowing that you have done right of course, there is a way to ask that question. You have to ask that question you have to bring it up because she herself has brought it up. Right. There are Catholic nominees out there who do not make their faith a particular issue in their judicial opinions, right? Like Neil. Gorsuch Piscopo, alien raised Catholic. I didn't know what religion you'll gorsuch was until he already been on the court for like two years all right I like like I had problems with Neil gorsuch based on his writings. I have problems with people like AC based on their writings. It just so happens that Seb's writings make an explicit tie between her religious views and her traditional views and the other the other thing that's worth saying I think in this context is that I care about views like I, I, you know I don't I don't begrudge her believing what she believes as a matter of faith I begrudge her imposing it on me. That, that's that's that's always the issue I have no problem with a person who says because I am X. I believe why in the law I have no problem with that. Whatever problem with is when you take because I believe X. I believe why in terms of law and you must as well that's what I'm like. Well, well, don't don't tell me why Jesus doesn't want me to have an abortion. Tell me why the ninth amendment of the Constitution doesn't allow me to have abortion because we can't do that. You can't do anything for. That's where that's where the argument is against this issue, and of course, there is a way to frame it as such but no matter what Republicans. Are GonNA say that you're being bigoted and Democrats are going to be scared about it. Also, I just don't know how much utility there is to asking such a question because the federalist society has spent forty years now building up a kind of secular justification for many extreme rulings that might be viewed as the acrostic. For instance, denying women control over their own bodies rolling back reproductive rights, you do not see e judges or Conservative attorneys justifying this on the basis of faith right? They say, oh no, you don't understand. The Fourteenth Amendment does not protect unrenumerated rights or the unborn children have a compelling like there are all of these other things that everyone can raise if they are ever. Accused of using their faith to judge, and so there is no point in accusing someone i. think of using their faith judge because there's always a neutral justification, a neutral response and like we both agree alley Republicans will pounce on it and claim that it's anti Catholic bias and a lot of Lily livered Democrats will say Oh. Yeah you're right this went way too far. The the issue is I think were both marketing also agreeing is that like there's no point engaging at all like there's there's no point having hearing. There's no point in lending legitimacy to an illegitimate process by having a sit-down hearing about her issues because it honestly doesn't Matt so sweet stop. Stop Stop because I absolutely was one of the people who said. Democrats, in the Senate shouldn't even show up for Neal gorsuch hearing because there should be yellow crime scene tape around Justice Scalia seat, and it was fascinating. You covered the hearings and like I think that the Democrats in the Senate were sort of both they're under protests and they're fighting on the merits and so there'd be lots of like lengthy passionate speeches about how we shouldn't even be here and this is illegitimate but also talk about the frozen trucker and I think you know if we really are quite serious I like the three of us are quite serious that to. Engage in this hearing on the merits is to bless this hearing on the merits is the tactic to just not show up or chain yourself to the Senate floor in which case let me just add parenthetically you're playing right into.
"judiciary committee" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"The house Judiciary Committee what a full appeals court to rehear a case involving former White House counsel don again the request comes after a divided three judge panel ruled last week that congressional subpoenas of the executive branch are legally unenforceable house attorneys want the full DC circuit court of appeals to hear the case saying if the previous decision stands it will undermine Congress's constitutional role as a check on the power of the executive branch the house Judiciary Committee subpoenaed White House counsel don again last year for testimony in the impeachment inquiry against president trump may again refused to comply Linda Kenyon Washington Brazilian president gyre Bolsonaro will meet with president trump at Mar a Lago tomorrow to discuss the crisis in Venezuela trade and other economic issues the U. S. government is backing Brazil's bid to join the thirty six country organization for economic cooperation and development of foreign policy but also I'm Evan handing and on Charlie pilot at Bloomberg world headquarters it was a down Friday but on all week for the U. S. stock market U. S. equities staging a furious rally in the final hour of trading in a week dominated by fear but the spreading coronavirus will up in global growth and melodious lead portfolio manager at wells capital management and that is it having a pretty quick impact on the economy globally and even as we kind of enter North America we're starting to see some impact on travel and other things on certainly corporate travelers that have impacted what we're going to be real quickly here what happens to leisure travel if we come up on spring break all of this on the job Friday and February's report suggests America's labor market was on firm footing before the coronavirus intensified with that story here's Bloomberg's Vinny del Jude eyes it's a big game two hundred seventy three thousand new jobs in February topping Wall Street forecasts by almost one hundred thousand the biggest gain since may twenty eighteen January job growth was revised higher as well in the unemployment rate tied a half century low three point five percent the road ahead is fraught with risks though as a coronavirus curves business activity thank god she likes to brag radio White House reaction from economic adviser Larry Kudlow interviewed on Bloomberg television and radio labour market looks excellent very strong and incidentally most sectors of the economy looks strong you also had this to say about the U. S. economy and the corona virus we are going to see some issues coming out from the corona virus I get that but I think for the United States this is gonna be a temporary problem S. and P. five hundred index down fifty one down one point seven percent nasdaq down a hundred and sixty three down one point nine percent the Dow down two hundred fifty six down one percent global news twenty four hours a day on air and on QuickTake by Bloomberg power by more than twenty seven hundred journalists and analysts in more than one hundred twenty countries I'm Charlie palette this is Bloomberg this is the business of sports let's talk Super Bowl and Fox Sports every single thing that occurs and what people remember this is a business currency money isn't necessarily guaranteed Michael ball in the valuations girl scouts are everybody loves rooting against the right to view the N. B. is never.
"judiciary committee" Discussed on The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
"Impeachment drafted pass by the committee but the investigation of the president's actions and its administration including these Ukraine issues is actually ongoingly of news tonight. On how new evidence is just hit into the judiciary committee record. We'll explain today. The Judiciary Committee formerly recommended impeaching Donald Trump for abusive power and obstruction of Congo's but the investigation into the freezing of that military aid. Ukraine continues in the investigating committees as well as in. This is interesting in the courts tonight. We have an update on some evidence entered into the record last night the center for a public integrity sued in federal court for documents related to the Ukraine scandal. And this is what they've got. Aw they won in court but what they got were heavily redacted documents. Why because the president doesn't want these documents to to see the light of day? I ask for unanimous consent chairman to enter these directions for the record and now we're joined by Dave Leventhal editor at large for the Senate Republican tax. which did sue the administration as mentioned? What did you get? What more do you need? We didn't get much in the sense that as you saw right there from the clip that the documents that we did about one hundred and forty-six pages worth of them were heavily redacted and many of the conversations that were happening between members of the the Department of Defense and the White House Office of Management and budget conversations. That could have been tantamount of some very interesting stuff directly related to the Ukraine situation. And we just don't have access to. We went back to court. Today filed a motion to effectively. Tell the judge. Hey look we gotta keep working on this and come Tuesday. We're going to have another bite at the apple. Are the Democrats also using their congressional subpoenas to try to get the same stuff. Yeah indeed in fact I had the these documents been released without the reductions. We may have had more information information than even congressional investigators have had an and then speaks to let me get you one of the point here because folks may have heard the White House finally put out an alternative out of explanation to why the money was frozen and said it wasn't to get the Biden's it was for legitimate foreign policy. Yada Yada it would seem that if these reductions were removed ooh the underlying material. If it's valid could show whether that's an after the fact sort of lie or whether if it were true there was contemporaneous letters like I supported it from the time I mean. Is that part of your argument well. Donald Trump earlier this year. Ra said that He is the most transparent president in the history of the United States. It seems like this would be an opportune time for him. If in fact that is the case and that is true for him to compel his own administration to release this this information that would shine a great deal of light and provide a great deal of transparency into an issue. That's at the heart of the impeachment inquiry and the ultimate impeachment. That's is going to happen next week of the president. He hasn't done that at this point. And we're going to continue to fight in court in order for the public to have the right to know what this information in in fact entails Dave thank you so much for joining six months ago before Donald Trump even called the president of Ukraine to ask for.
"judiciary committee" Discussed on The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
"Know like norm. I was gobsmacked last night when I first saw this tape it was very difficult to process. The leader of the Senate went on national television and vowed to violate the oath of office that he was going to take impeachment pitchman preceding started. And I as I have watched it over and over today I'm even more disbelieving than I was the first time that I thought of course as we know that that's not how the Clinton process work it is of course a inherently a political process. But what happened during Clinton Woods much more in in line with our expectations. The problem going into impeachment. After having McConnell take this sort of a vow is there's no way that trump can truly be exonerated even if the Senate votes to acquit him. It's a rig jury it's not an acquittal is such a great point because it is it is instructive to the fact that all of this norm appears to be a blatant power. Play you go on Hannity to assure everyone. Don't worry there's not even a pretense or a head fake fake being a real process now again. Whether every Republican senator other senator goes along as an is a different question. But this is the tone McConnell setting and I just WanNa read because it does matter particularly not only does it matter under the law but for people who say they are originalist or Conservative about the tax or they care about their their duties under the the constitution. I want to read this oath for Senate trials which says I solemnly swear or affirm and all things pertaining to the trial in this impeachment now pending I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws. So help me God nor do you see it as important for people to actually dig into this point which is about process separate from what you think trump did and really raise the fact that you have a senator one center maybe more appearing to be planning running to stand up and swear to something they don't believe and not just any senator he's the majority leader of the Senate and when you go John Hannity show which is critical place for the followers of Donald Trump and in effect say. I'm Reagan this process and I'm going to try to make sure that every other Republican goes along it's putting pressure on them as well and you know how this plays out is going to be a curious thing but boy if I were the Democrats in the Senate I would be raising. Holy Hell every minute about this as Joyce said. The Clinton impeachment was inherently political but the members tried to follow the facts. They had votes and in some cases disagreed on what witnesses to call but they said a fair process in place and we had Republicans who decided added after hearing the facts that it didn't rise to the level of impeachment and Democrats. Who decided that it did? We're not going to see any of that at this point. And it's just further poisoning of the process and one that Mitch McConnell has basically blown up over the last decade or more in the Senate. There isn't a norm remaining in the body that he hasn't isn't taken on well and you got to wonder where Chuck Schumer on all this I mean Mitch McConnell's out doing is TV laps and making his making himself clear speaker. Pelosi obviously Veasley got her carcass together in process does Chuck Schumer get out front. Does he lied on this. Does he take on this person. And you know it's not a hard argument to make you say it would mitch. McConnell wants to be judged this way by a judge You know if it was rigged would anyone trust a process like like this and if the answer is no that obviously they're they're falling down norm Ornstein. Thank you very much. Joyce is I'M GONNA come back to you. I have one other story to get to with you so hang hang tight rudy. Giuliani.
"judiciary committee" Discussed on The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
"I'M GONNA put my foot on the scale. I mean boldly said that he is coordinating with the White House. How can a juror coordinate with the defended? You find his corrupt you think he is he infects people. Was that why you don't hang out with him. I don't think we have much in common as well as you say. There's there's much to keep track of here and it's certainly certainly true that as we're going to be covering tonight. The Senate appears ready to dispense with traditions. That it's held for a long time. Apparently bowing trump at least some Republican senators. We're GONNA get ended that Congresswoman Karen Bass staying up with us. Thank you so much. Thanks for having me on. We turn now to David. Corn Washington bureau chief for Jones and the author of Russian Roulette. Maria Theresa Kamar Presencio has NCO Voto Latino both analysts here. David what do you think. I think it was historic day. As you noted the only president who's ever been then impeach dry almost impeachable go to the House floor in his first term and I think a lot of the screaming at least for the moment is over. I assume there'll be more. We get to the House floor but having sat through those hearings for several weeks having been in the hearing room for many of the days it was very dispiriting to see Republicans begins. Just come out and flat out deny reality. You could argue whether this was impeachable gets to the level of the ultimate political punishment. But they would just come out out and say it didn't happen there wasn't a quid pro quo. There was nothing wrong. He never he didn't even ask the Wenski to investigate anyone or Biden. All those things are untrue. So so now this SORTA re- reality distortion campaign. Disinformation campaign on the part of Republicans. At least has a pause and I think the public can. I don't think there's going to be a lot out of persuasion. One way or the other but at least can reflect upon the fact that things have gotten to the point where the Democrats felt. They had no choice as you know in house. Democratic leaders were not happy Roach into impeachment throughout this year but they felt they had no choice on the basis of the facts and the evidence they brought to baroness career. I think the fact that they've brought this to bear was because they recognize that if they do not impeach the president if they do not sound the alarm our election integrity haggerty is still vulnerable to foreign interference and is that the Democrats are trying to do is recognize. Make sure that the public recognizes that. This is an ongoing criminal investigation that if the president does not feel that he's going to be repudiated he will continue welcoming foreign interference. What I do everyday are is trying to get people all to register to participate in to vote? And if they feel that their vote is not be recognized and not being respected that undermines the underpinnings of art democracy of participation their their choice to go forward is not small and every single person should be watching what the Republicans decide to do on the Senate side the Republicans the job according to the Constitution on the Senate side is to hear a trial to be to be impartial and to listen to the facts that is their job. The fact that Mitch McConnell Right now now is saying that. He's going to do a dotted line of whatever. The White House says. Shame on him because he's abdicating his duty he's abdicating what the voters are expecting a true public servant to this country. David I'm curious as we watch those hearings Washington as a place where you can't take a lot at face value so you had a lot of Republicans publican's in those hearings wanting the country to think that this was some sort of farce on their uniform and opposed to because that's their political incentive vignette. There may be some who privately resent that the the president brought them into this mess and then if they have to do this type of defense of the party there may be some. I'm who secretly think maybe it's good that Donald Trump's getting a hard time of it although they can't obviously admit that to their conservative base and then there's the president and his aides themselves David who very recently were claiming and it would appear to be lying in saying that impeachment would be good. It would be good for them politically. Bring it on that's sort of fake bravado. And now you have this reporting. And it's backed up by Donald trump breaking his own record of tweets ever and a day as he lashes out the angrily. I mean he's not he's not longer holding back and pretending not anger. Let me read from this interesting times. Account that says Donald Trump's nursing this resentment over the red mark about about to be tattooed on his page in the history books as only the third president American history to be impeached no matter what some of his critics say advisers. I said he genuinely does not want to be impeached. Viewing it as a personal humiliation. You think even in private the article continues. He accepts no blame. Expresses Regret Gretzky rails against the enemies. He sees all around him. I don't know if you've finished Succession David on HBO. Yeah yeah no spoilers spoilers but there is a scene where you see someone who's hardball person hurt by someone else hardball and they. At least take some pride in the fact that the the person could finally stand up and you have to wonder if deep down Donald trump who takes no blame whatsoever is looking at his political opponents and and understanding. Wow they're actually standing up to him and he says he feels feels humiliated. Listen we've talked about this in the past. Donald Trump is pathological narcissist. He does care fact the only thing he cares about is how he is seeing. That is how he believes. He is seen so one reason. He's in this impeachment. Imbroglio now is because of the Russia's scandal he tried to get Linski not just to look at Biden but investigate a debunk conspiracy theory. That said Russia did not hack the the election to help donald trump and it was Ukraine and it was all craziness because he knows his presidency is tainted and has and is it. It has a partial degree of illegitimacy because of the Russian intervention that he refuses to acknowledge. He can't even talk about protecting this country from another possible attack. In twenty twenty a partial or anybody else apartment grease is that issue of illegitimacy. I've never heard you be so restrained. David as an IT straight be somber but my point is that he does care about these things and this is serious seeking trivialize it as petty partisanship but it is serious. And you know the historical record the current record which will become. The historical record is clear for anybody to study what he did. And what the people around him did. And it's rather damning already and that's even before we find out what the New York has an Rudy Giuliani and all that all those other people who are working on trump's behalf Maria I wonder if you could speak to the way David brings it all together. which is a history now will have an inflection point of? Oh what did people do to stand up up to X Y Z. And how did the system work. And when and how was this president who did so many things that defied norms and literally has multiple. The adviser is incarcerated right now some things they did for him Michael Cohen. Some things they did for the Ukrainians and Russians wall working for him. Paul Manafort who lied and it may may or may not have been for the president would seem today of all days along with any House vote next week is an inflection action point where history will take stock of what exactly happened and who stood up to this president and this is. This is the challenge. Our last impeachment with a tablet impeachment. It was President Clinton being impeached for sexual relations with a consenting adult. This is completely different. This actually has the vulnerability of the republic on its hands and for Republicans to sit idly by and basic trying to wash their hands as much talent pilot pretending that it's business as usual. That is not the case ace and when we start talking about the real Russian interference to dismantle our democracy. We should all have not only are hair on fiber. Also be incredibly saddened when when Fiona Hill spoke to Congress and she said that she was both angry and sad. I think she was talking about so many Americans right now. There cannot will that are staring in disbelief relief regardless of party to see president to see a a whole party not standing up for our values and it is the Democrats that are doing it despite not wanting to because they know that there's an election in in the horizon they know that it seems incredibly partisan. But if they don't do it then they are not standing up to the rule of law as determined by the Constitution. This is not small. Not Small at all David Gordon. My thanks to both of you coming up. We have a deeper dive.
"judiciary committee" Discussed on The 11th Hour with Brian Williams
"Debate. I think that's actually pretty good word for it. You had Democrats trying to elevate the conversation here a little little bit. Make this about the constitution historical moment something. They didn't want to do but felt they had to. There are a lot of biographical speeches from some of these members. He's trying to describe how they got to this point where they're ready to impeach a sitting president and the Republican strategy was interesting to assign from a couple of members. What you heard by enlarge large was not a debate about this specific facts in Ukraine case but rather than trying to make a case that this was inevitable the minute the Democrats regained control of the House after the two thousand eighteen midterms that Democrats? They said we're trying to keep a promise to their base. Made starting back in late twenty. Sixteen that they would impeach this as president but this was not a lot of the procedural hijinks. This was not as nasty as what we will probably see tomorrow when they resume the markup and get into this four this process of exchanging amendments on a set of documents that let's be clear will not be amended. They will come out of this committee the same way they went in But we're GONNA see a whole lot of I think much more bitter fighting about the wording of these documents Republican efforts to to to change them before the die is cast and the votes are taken taking tomorrow afternoon sometime. That's one point. I wanted to make for any of the kids majoring in government. Who might be watching tonight? I'm not proud of the fact that I have been to markups before and I remember them as marking up documents submitting wording having it accepted or rejected tonight was was kind of preambles. So you're saying tomorrow. Are we actually get down to wording and maybe amending the nine pages that we've seen so far. Yeah that's the idea. Because this is such a momentous Sir resolution really only about nine pages but so important. They stretch this process out over two days. They justed member opening statements tonight. The real. You'll work happens tomorrow with the mark but again this is not a you know a spending bill or an authorization bill that you'll have tons of small amendments that might get accepted opted or changed or language tweaked. This is something that was painstakingly put together by committee chair people and by the Democratic leadership by the speaker and sort of locked Kim before it ever made its way back to the Judiciary Committee the amendments that will be offered we'll becoming from Republicans. Some of them might be Germane to impeachment. Some of them might not not have anything to do with impeachment all on purely designed to slow down the process tomorrow. Democrats want their document to get through. They've got the votes it will but this there's one last opportunity for Republicans to gum up the works here a little bit and when you're in the minority In the house. That's really all you can do is slow something like this down and Garrett as we mentioned tomorrow night a lot of them are heading out to Andrews to get on government planes to fly to Europe to mark the seventy fifth anniversary of the battle of the bulge for any of our viewers wondering why the calendar has been compressed into a Thursday markup session Garrett Hake get some rest thanks very much for hanging out with us so late at night after the long day you've had Garrett Hey covering Capitol Hill for us another break.
"judiciary committee" Discussed on The 11th Hour with Brian Williams
"Assumes that the president is going to one sort of as many people as possible not just defending him but people like Alan Dershowitz who have done so publicly who've done so on television who have done so on Fox News and has made a forceful case not just on the legal merits but in the court of public opinion. which in some ways is where the president and his team believes? This is being fought. That's where they thought. The Muller fight was being fought they were correct in that. And they want someone who who is fiery and I. I think that's why you're hearing Mr Dershowitz. His name floated right now. Meco Yang among the defenses mounted tonight that you heard from the Republicans is. Do you hear anything. That is convertible to their argument that they're going to have to post in the Senate and Coralie anything if if you assigned yourself the floor manager for defending trump. How would you go? Well we didn't hear any any substantive defenses of the president and what the Republicans were arguing this evening. What they were basically Arguing was that the process has been unfair now. The whole point of a fair process is to to allow both sides to present their case but we have not heard substantive defense of what the president has done other than he did it. Get over it So they really have very little that they can argue here. I actually think that defending the president in this process is going to be a very difficult task and what it comes down two was just straight partisan loyalty for these Republican Senators Phil Rucker. There's no Jan toll or dignified way to ask this to the White House feel that they have have Republicans in the Senate willing to be as nakedly aggressive and sometimes fact neutral as some of the Republicans is on the House have proven to be the answer. Brian is a little bit complicated The vote in the Senate seems pretty much preordained at this point. It appears appear that all the Republican senators are likely to vote to acquit President trump his removal from office does not appear to be in the offing and the White House is very confident about that assessment. But what you're hearing from. President trump is that he wants there to be a big trial a big show of force in defending him. He's He's thinking much more about the public relations aspect of this. How will it frame the reelection campaign ahead through November and he wants to take advantage of the Senate trial L. on home turf so to speak because it's controlled by Republicans to put up a show to drag hunter Biden in as a witness to drag Adam Schiff in as a witness witness to have fiery defenses of the president's conduct and what you're hearing from Senate leaders you heard it there from Senator Graham Senator Thune the number two Republican told our colleagues in the post today There's much less of an appetite for that among the senators. They WANNA get this. Vote taken care of quickly Turn the page and move on and so that's where the tension relies or resides right now within the Republican coalition. Ashley Parker. You were in Hershey. PA last night Just as a television viewer. There was anger in that arena at the trump rallies. Talk about how and how often the President Inc operated impeachment into his remarks. Impeachment was the through line of his remarks last night. You could sense that anger on television. You said and you could really feel that. They're being there in the arena. In Hershey Pennsylvania in the president would move on to sort of touting positive aspects of his presidency of the the economy but he would always return to impeachment. And you could just tell this was something is sort of the emotional. Dichotomy of the president on this issue is on display there because it was something that infuriates him. It angers him. It's something he can't help but talk about. He views it as undermining the legitimacy of his presidency so part of his impeachment. riff was trying undermine impeachment. Saying it's impeachment light and they're trying to impeach him for doing nothing wrong but at the same time you also saw him trying to make it into a political issue acknowledging gene that he believes the silver lining of impeachment was forced Democrats to strike a deal with him on the US trade issue and saying to his voters using it to rally them. And saying this is the Democrats trying to subvert. Your will trying to undo twenty sixteen and foil you again in twenty twenty and so it's both it's a rallying cry cry and it's something that is so deeply upsetting to him. He can't help but talk about it. In a moat became if the White House had a change of heart and delivered averred to the hill. Reams of paper tomorrow and said you've got us. Here's all the documents we could find. This should respond to everything. You've subpoenaed. Would they get out from under an obstruction of Congress article and are they willing to take that article as opposed to doing in just that. I think that they would rather take the article that actually produce. The documents is not just the documents there are also ten. Witnesses who have refused is to appear in defiance of a subpoena which no other president has done before we all remember in the Clinton administration even the presence personal assistant. Betty Currie came to testify survive. The people really close with intimate knowledge of the President and past impeachments have come to testify about what has been happening there. Trump hasn't allowed any of that and I think he's concerned about the story that they would tell otherwise. This whole argument the Republicans are making about. How Democrats should sue to enforce subpoenas? They never once asked ask the president. Just let them come forward and talk. It's very simple to solve and they're unwilling to do it. They'd rather have the article of obstruction. Fill you and your colleague. Dan unbolt at the Post. Did a kind of canvassing of elected officials Talking about the kind of era of disinformation. We find ourselves in. What were your findings? Brian a couple of things the the last couple of days and especially earlier this week in a single single day It really spotlighted. The extent to which distance formation and distrust is defining our political system and and really halting the levers of government. Here here we saw that with the way the president and his allies have responded to the Inspector General's report Out of the Justice Department and among those allies by the way is the the attorney. General himself Bill Bar using that report Spreading some false information and attacking the FBI but we saw more broadly that this impeachment proceeding has served to even further divide and inflame the tensions in the country. There's a lot of concern among the former governors from in both parties that we spoke to who are in their outposts their states all across the country that this is a real inflection point in our country's history that we're not gonNA find any any resolution until November of twenty twenty and the election when voters have essay and that the divide could continue well beyond that depending on the outcome and depending First first and foremost on. How president trump handles Ashley you get the last word? I need you to talk about a story you covered and wrote about tonight the executive order order from the president that defines Jewishness ask an ethnic group not only a religion. It was instantly instantly controversial. Why is that well? It's complicated because the president his allies say and Jared Kushner has an op. Ed about about this that it is basically making it easier to prevent antisemitic behavior because there are protections given to a nationality that religious groups oops. Don't get it is just simply problematic to to classify Jews that way for starters and then there was also some controversy Over that it was squashing. Free speech and that this will be used to limit free speech on college. Campuses which is where a lot of this activism is taking place. Ace never an easy or uncomplicated story at the White House. Thank you very much to all three of you Phil Rucker to Ashley Parker to Meco Jianghua greatly appreciated and coming up for US tonight.
"judiciary committee" Discussed on The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
"The smoking gun reloaded and then really. Are we going to stop him. Our Republican colleagues. Going to say that there is anything. Wrong An unconstitutional about asking a foreign power to engage in our democracy and take power away from we the people which his really where the president derives his power from we. The people has Chairman Nadler Given you members of the committee. Any idea who will be selected. You'd be a managers house managers who go to the Senate floor to present the case against Donald Trump in the senate trial no. We really haven't talked about that at all. We are really focused on doing the work in front of us. That is going to be speaker Pelosi's decision but we have big work work to do here as we finish up tomorrow I think the Republicans were you know. Did Not Enter rupp very much. They didn't they didn't try to Bring down the precedings tonight but I think tomorrow we may see something different. We may see them once again. Trying to object trying to disrupt and really taking taking us away from this really crucial question of our Constitution and cars. When I know you have to be back out on at nine? Am tomorrow morning there and the committee so we thank you very very much. ACTRE- join us. I really appreciate it. Thank you lawrence great to be with you but is tonight's last words. Hey It's Chris Hayes. Sometimes it's good to just take a step back from the day-to-day onslaught of news and take our broader. Look at the issues. That's what I'm doing each week. My podcast why is this happening exploring topics ranging from school segregation to climate a change. Well the way that I think of it is. Climate Change will be to the twentieth century. What Madeira not was the nineteenth century? It'll be the central subject of questions about economic justice. Everything um you care about in the world will be affected by climate and digging deep with guests uniquely qualified to analyze issues from mass incarceration to race relations as you know for the first time in our history at the national level whites are on the verge of losing their majority status in twenty years. And I think it's no coincidence that our politics are getting more tribal. Join me for. Why is this happening? New episodes every Tuesday. Wherever you get your podcasts?.
"judiciary committee" Discussed on The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
"Trump directed Rudy Giuliani to smear his political rival. Donald Trump fired an anti corruption ambassador. You're who stood in his way. Donald Trump withheld three hundred ninety one million dollars in aid that was essential to Ukraine and Donald. Donald trump withheld a White House. Meeting and less Ukraine's president would do him a favor in this scheme. Donald Trump was not an incidental player. He was the central player and anything we don't know about what Donald Trump did is because donald trump continues to this moment to block us from knowing Donald Trump used his office to abuse his power to re elected himself. Barb mcquaid what did you make of that summary of the case against Donald Trump. I thought congressman swallow did an excellent job of summarizing the case. They're just did in the questioning in yesterday's it's hearing where he asked the Council for the Democrats in a similar way. He asked a series of questions all of which elicited the same same answer. You know who was it. who hired Rudy Giuliani to smear Joe Biden president trump? Who Was it who withheld the president trump? Who has it who withheld the White House meeting eating president trump and so focusing that this was not a rogue Rudy Giuliani? This was not underlings at the State Department. This was president trump utilizing. His is office to put his own personal political interests ahead of the interests of the country. And I think when you frame it that way it really makes the question of impeachment a very compelling telling one Lisa graves we heard a vast array of irrelevant things thrown into the mix by Republicans. Tonight my favorite included D- dragging in Robert Deniro and Kathy Griffin and complaining about how the President of the United States has suffered so much watch including negative things said about him by Robert Deniro and Kathy Griffin. It's harder that that to me is the best description of the emptiness of the defense case that we were hearing tonight. I think that's right in one of the things that really struck me is just how little Republicans have to say. They were subdued tonight but they lied and they continue obviously for this president and the idea that this president is so thin skinned that they're lament is over him being insulted when he the insult. So many people on a regular basis is astonishing to me but also in in that way think denigrates the importance of this matter. This is about our democracy about our or constitution and those Democratic senators in that committee or Party. Democratic Representative Committee spoke so eloquently about the evidence the only evidence we have before us is compelling testimony under oath showing time and again all the support for this. NPR these impeachment a piece. Because it's clear there's evidence substantial substantial evidence to impeach the president and the president has mounted no defense and his allies have basically just continued to skate and try to misdirect the American people and Iran claimed. It didn't seem like with your experience in the way. These hearings are organized. It did seem like there was an organizing principle in the Republicans approach tonight because totally and I really mean mostly just the volume part of it and the lack of emotion in it was unusual for them. They quieted down They kind of rushed through their statements. They they weren't leaning very hard on any particular part of this Jim Jordan was not not a memorable entry. Even in this discussion tonight. And that seems like a coordinated decision of some. Yeah I think from their perspective. They're trying to make AAC what happened over on the Senate side Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the. I report the news of the day but I think Lawrence that's going to be a very very failed effort. I mean we've only had a president get to this stage of the impeachment process four times in the two hundred and thirty your history of this country and nothing that happened today. The Senate Judiciary Committee is is going to change the historic nature. What's happening in the house? Tonight change the historic significance of the houses action move towards impeachment and certainly none of in any way shape or form relevant to the conduct houses looking at today so I think they've got a very tactical approach here for a very historic moment. And I think they've missed the mark once again very badly. Jill do expect the Republicans to continue with this particular with this strategic approach of just. Let's let's do this kind of in a muted and quiet way and rush through it as much as we can. I don't see what choice they have. They don't have any exculpatory evidence. If they did they would have presented long ago. So if you can't argue the facts and I wrote an op Ed in Doc Tober with sixteen of my Watergate colleagues and we basically predicted where we are. We said the Congress shouldn't wait that there is a prime facial case that that means there's a case in plain sight for all to see and that was long before we had the hearings with live witnesses testifying to what Donald Trump himself had done putting it right in his hands. It's just like the June twenty third smoking gun tape. Jill one banks Barbara mcquade. Lisa is a great for unclaimed. Thank you all for starting off tonight. And when we come back today congressman. Jim Jordan was invited to attend a luncheon in the Senate with all of the Republican senators presumably to discuss the defensive Donald Trump in the Senate impeachment trial congressman. Jim himes joins US next to explain what Jim Jordan doesn't and seem to know about the evidence against.
"judiciary committee" Discussed on The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
"All during this breaking news night. We can't tell you right now for sure exactly who will be joining us in this hour because as the House Judiciary Committee continues its work session tonight on the articles articles of impeachment. Some of the members of that committee might be able to join us this hour. If they get their work done we definitely will be joined by a member of the Senate Senate Judiciary Committee who asked some of the most important questions in today's hearing with the Justice Department. Inspector General Senator Amy Klobuchar kept the focus on the big picture in that hearing hearing today and she will probably be taking a new oath in January. It is the oath. The Senate Administers Two senators when they act as jurors And an impeachment. Trial the house judiciary. Committee's articles of impeachment being debated tonight are based on the investigative work of the House Intelligence Committee and Carson. Jim Hines as a member of the House Intelligence Committee. He is one of the people who will definitely be joining US tonight. The House Judiciary Committee is now working toward voting on articles of impeachment. Tomorrow The Standard Procedure the Judiciary Committee and most committees is from the chairman and ranking minority member to make opening statements only but tonight for for this momentous hearing chairman allowed each member of the committee Democrat and Republican to make opening statements. After Chairman Nadler began the historic session with these words. Today we begin consideration of two articles of impeachment against President Donald J trump. The I started charges that the president used the powers of his public office to demand that a foreign government attack his political rivals the second second article charges that the president obstructed the congressional investigation into his conduct. Other presidents have resisted congressional oversight but President. Trump's stonewall was complete absolute and without precedent in American history taken together the two articles charge charge president trump with placing his private political interests above our national security above are free and fair elections and above above our ability to hold public officials accountable. Most of the Republicans did not did not mention any of the evidence referenced in the articles of impeachment impeachment But we will. Now go to the hearing as congressman. Joe Negotiates makes his opening remarks listening and watching who may disagree agree with the steps. This committee is taking. I hope that you will understand that. We are proceeding on this path..
"judiciary committee" Discussed on The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
"Morning let us begin. where founders unders began in seventeen seventy six when in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another with those words? Our founders courageously began our declaration of independence pendants from an oppressive monarch for among other grievances. The King's refusal to follow rightfully passed laws. In the of course of today's events it becomes necessary for us to address among other grievances the president's failure to faithfully execute the law our democracy is what is at stake. The president leads us no choice but to act because he is trying to corrupt once again the election for his own benefit. The president has engaged in abusive power undermining our national security and jeopardizing the integrity of our elections. His actions are in defiance of the vision of our founders and the oath of office that he takes to preserve protect and defend the constitution toossion of the United States sadly but with confidence and humility with allegiance to our founders and her heart full of love for America today. I am asking our chairman to proceed with articles of impeachment. I commend our committee chairs in our members verse or their Sombor Approach to actions which are wish the president had not made necessary and signing the declaration of Independence Our founders invoked a firm reliance on divine Providence Democrats to our prayerful and we will proceed lead in a manner worthy of oath of office to support in defend the constitution of the United States from all enemies foreign fine and domestic. So help us. God thank you and with that Nancy. Pelosi guaranteed that Donald Trump will be the third president of the United States impeached by the House of Representatives. The House Judiciary Committee will right and vote on on articles of impeachment. Those articles of impeachment will pass in the committee and then be voted on by the full House of Representatives and some or all of the articles of impeachment and will pass the House of Representatives and j trump will take his place in history as an impeached present. We don't yet know the exact timetable title for all of that. But it could happen before Christmas. The House Judiciary Committee has its next impeachment. Hearing scheduled for Monday when they will consider the evidence in the House Intelligence Committee's He's written report of its impeachment investigation of the president's solicitation of help in his reelection campaign from the president of Ukraine by asking the president of Ukraine to investigate Joe by after making her historic announcement. This morning speaker of the house went about her regular duties including conducting later or her regularly scheduled press conference about House of Representatives Business in which she discussed the two hundred seventy five bills that she has passed through the House of Representatives with bipartisan votes. That are all now on Mitch. McConnell desk in the United States Senate where he is ignoring norring them and refusing to allow them to come to a vote and then when the speaker was leaving that press conference a reporter decided to shout out out a question. The reporter James Rosen. Who spent almost as much time working at Fox News as disgraced sexual Predator Bill O'Reilly and who left Fox News? According to The New York Times quote after the network began scrutinizing sexual misconduct allegations. Against Him James Rosen now works for a much less prominent right wing so called news organization and he asked Nancy Pelosi the kind of question that would have made his former Fox boss sexual predator. Roger ailes very very proud President uh-huh anybody could donate any not world positive representing college. Yesterday suggested that the Democrats are doing. Don't I don't want to do. It said why.
"judiciary committee" Discussed on WSJ What's News
"Small. North American SONGBIRDS are getting smaller. A new study has found that over the past forty years. The birds bodies shrank but their wings grew longer. The findings were based on measurements of more than seventy thousand birds across fifty two different species. He's collected by the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago. Our Science writer Robert Louis hosts has more on the findings. These are not changes that a normal normal person would be able to notice. No bird watcher in central park with their binoculars is going to pick up on this but what it shows is is that as biologists and ecologists have long suspected. There is a relationship between temperature and body size that they they know and we're now seeing it play out as temperatures rise in the modern world the findings also have implications for other species. What stands out about this kind of work is? This is a measurement of things that have occurred. This is a natural record of change change in the natural world that has already happened and it's neither good nor bad. What it's telling us is that the world is changing and that animal species in this instance? Birds are responding by changing to adapt. We should do the same at the Wall Street. Journal's Robert Lee hosts and that's news for this Wednesday afternoon. I'm Anne Marie for totally for the Wall Street Journal. Thanks for listening..
"judiciary committee" Discussed on NewsRadio 1020 KDKA
"Now the house Judiciary Committee will begin the next phase with its own public hearings next week they've already received subpoenas to appear the president joked about being Cory well hosting the traditional pardoning of thanksgiving turkeys but he's complained in the past about not being involved if you have a kangaroo court changes president trump and his counsel are invited to attend in next week's hearing chairman Jerry Nadler is also expected to invite to legal experts to discuss the constitutional grounds for impeachment Laura passed a CBS news the White House suffered a defeat in court a federal judge ruled the trump administration can't block former White House counsel don McGann from complying with the congressional subpoena to testify in a one hundred twenty page opinion judge contention brown Jackson rules the former top White House lawyer must appear before the house Judiciary Committee Jackson rejected the sweeping claims of absolute immunity put forward by the trump administration in its effort to shield senior officials from congressional subpoenas the judge ruled that no one is above the law and then in particular presidents are not kings if don McGann is made to testify about how president trump ordered him to fire special counsel Robert Muller other witnesses such as former national security adviser John Bolton would lose their rationale for failing to appear in the impeachment inquiry as boldness signal he has plenty to say he's been waiting for the courts to weigh in on the weight of congressional subpoenas but judge Jackson say likely won't be the final one the White House says it will appeal her ruling CBS news White House correspondent Stephen Portnoy ousted secretary of the navy Richard Spencer speaking out about his exit from the Pentagon after defense secretary mark as per accused him of engaging in secret talks with the White House about disciplining navy seal Edward Gallagher accused of war crimes and convicted of posing with the corpse of an ISIS fighter Gallagher was fighting to keep his prize trident seal pain more from correspondent David Martin what do I stand for secretary of the navy good order and discipline of the United States Navy that's a prime tenant this in fact roads that former navy secretary Richard Spencer told CBS news that president trump's decision to intervene in the Gallagher case sends a dangerous message to the troops that you can get away with things you we have to have good order and discipline it's the backbone of what we do Spencer was fired by defense secretary mark as for for going behind his back in an attempt to work out a deal that would convince the president he didn't need to intervene sector Spencer a proposed a deal whereby the present allow the navy to hand the case he would guarantee that any Gallagher would be restored to rank allowed to retain his trident and permitted to retire according to structure the response from White House lawyers was quote nope holders will be involved Geller was demoted after he was convicted of posing for photos with the dead isis fighter president trump told reporters he stepped in to restore Gallagher's Frank and let him keep his trident in order to stand up for warriors and the decisions they have to make on the battlefield I don't think he really understands the full definition of a war fighter war fighters a profession of arms in the profession of arms has standards that they have to be held to and they hold themselves to Spencer Warren Gallagher's case was about more than just one navy seal the special operating community has been put under amazing pressure to do amazing things and they're amazing performing people but there's ramifications to happen with that and we have to build a system around it that has disciplined people look up to us and go yes they actually stick by what they say and they take the higher ground you think in this case the US has not stopped by what it said to date I think it has but and action like this the roads that Steven Martin reporting from the Pentagon a White House celebration Monday for hero dog tone emerge from the oval office tail wagging the Belgian Malinois why and its US special forces team had just been honored for taking down ISIS leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi in Syria last month Colin got a plaque and a metal along with some pats on the head and scratches behind the ears for a job.
"judiciary committee" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio
"Provide that to the Judiciary Committee to make sure that we protect the country in the election that's yet to come com do you think it's possible that there will be other parts of the articles of impeachment they do not have to deal with Ukraine I know that this is just let me put it this way to put it away if it were up to you and I got I guess it gets up term now learn the Judiciary Committee but for up to you what the articles of impeachment should they be written focus only on Ukraine well within our committee what we're focused on is of a set the consolation issues around Ukraine as well as the the blanket obstruction of Congress vis a vis the Ukraine investigation others been more obstruction Congress that goes beyond Ukraine there's also the obstruction of justice that Miller wrote about so extensively and there are other violations of the constitution that we will need to consider I'm not at this point Sheik prepared to say what what I'll recommend and ultimately if only Democrats vote to impeach the president trump present president from and Republicans and maybe a couple Democrats do not vote to impeach him vote against that doesn't that suggest that this is a pardon partisan impeachment wouldn't that hurt the credibility of the impeachment that only Democrats to support I think what it will mean if we decide that we cannot accept this kind of conduct in the present nine states and the Republicans decide that because of the president's party or because they're afraid of a primary for whatever reason they cannot vote to support impeachment I think it'll mean a failure by the GOP to put the country above their party and it will have very long term consequences if that's where we end up and if not today I think Republican members in the future to their children and grandchildren will have to explain why they did nothing in the face of this deeply on ethical man who did such damage to the country president Nixon resigned rather than be impeached he was never actually impeached by the house it was going through the process and he resigned before could happen do you think president trump should resign well I certainly think that he's committed the most grievous misconduct I have no illusions about Donald Trump doing what's right for the country or what's best for the country that's never been where he's coming from what my Republican colleagues I think need to to decide and to search their own conscience about is why was it that in the past Republicans were willing to put country first why were there people like Howard Baker then but not now I would hope that there will be Republicans who will be willing to step forward and say whatever the political consequences if this was Barack Obama had done this they would have voted to impeach him in a heart beat with a fraction of the evidence it shouldn't matter this is a Republican president I hope to hell Jake if this had been a democratic president I would be among those leading the way and saying we need to seriously consider impeaching his present term Adam Schiff thanks so much for your time today we appreciate thank Jeff the impeachment inquiry has a real serious allegations against president trump next I'm gonna talk to one of the president's.
"judiciary committee" Discussed on 860AM The Answer
"Judiciary Committee out a deep dive into the origins of the Russian pro center where does this investigation stands well you've got three lines are you got what the committee will do my committee you've got an instructor arm is looking at criminality using as a turning Connecticut and got the hall was inspector general report but I think will be coming out in weeks not days not months now played the harlot this report is going to be ugly and damning regarding the department justice handling of the Russian probe did you hear that Charles Oakley and damning damning regarding the a Russian pro shops in managing this imagine if you're running from I run for office I was state representative here in the state of Illinois I know how tough and how hard it is just a even put your name on the ballot and run for office now imagine your own government then sets up an investigation you into your campaign without your not solicit Dianne Feinstein senator di offense not Feinstein Jenna driver something was going on hanky panky with that you know what the FBI did they reached out to her to give her a call to give her a heads up to say Hey what was going on why couldn't they have done that to the trump campaign why what was the reason why they couldn't pick up the phone or call one of the call drop in and say hello this is what's going on we think we got some hanky panky going on you know why because they want to destroy his got it what is it that they had no idea he will be president at all and we couldn't have come in there and clean up this mess that's what I think what is the reason why but here's a cynic in me though here's my problem I get it and conservatives are gonna rah rah and say yeah this is going to be damn and I can't wait for it to happen but you know realistically you know about the power and the money and all that kind of stuff what are the chances that they will actually be full both investigation clear determination of what happened and I won all three and prosecution and punishment for anyone who may have done anything criminal what currently room of the I. D. V. I. G. report is not a criminal investigation I'm currently the term investigation is not acrylic dorms is that you said it was good it's basically right now as an administrative review of what happened now I I think I think because rumor dorms investigation is not complete the IG report is complete that I've I've just based upon us Jon Solomon from the hill that investigation is complete now when it comes to what dorm is doing if he then in fact after his and that's gonna you know I was a police officer then this was this would be to pick my interest in my Spidey sense raise up on on the back of my my neck when I saw how this investigation even began I knew something was up I knew something was wrong and you know Lindsey Graham goes on to say you know I'm really I'm really curious about the role that the CIA play here we know that the files a worn application was based on a dossier from Christopher seal that was biased against struck pay for about Hillary Clinton campaign by the way and I was one problem but this was whole this was a whole intent Telligent operation what role did the CIA play you know he who knew about this in the White House there's a question was president Obama be briefed on the fact that they will open up the counter intelligence investigation gets dropped campaign that's I think I think the whole world wants to know that well yeah that's true I mean it's all important stuff it'd be good to know but the issue is that nothing go I just being a cynic saying we could even we may get lucky even if we get to the point that all that information is is out there but even if it is out there the problem becomes what happens because of it so all that information is out there and then they're just going to find some creative way to walk away so we're angry we know what happened and nobody gets in trouble yeah but I I think how I don't know if that's going to happen is do you think Barack Obama's going to you know how to I don't think I don't think at all I think that's impossible to not ability with do you think what we we are very known that she that's all on Hillary anyone besides a fall guy is what I'm asking well as as in these type of I guess investigation that's normally what happens the fall guy well you don't have what you want right what you want is the people responsible to be found guilty what city was it that's what this is what you have to understand about government investigations that's always a clean up as always the clean up process conspiracy theories but it gives conspiracy theorist but I think that's part that was part of having a Andrew Weissmann at all those people involved in the initial investigation I think they clean it up I think beget based upon as as a as an officer investigating the crime I I can see the through the pores mystery doctrine fallen in here somehow some way in the coming days well I hope you write I hope we do find out what happened and that something actually happens to those who were responsible but this is the whole for leave it there will you listen to jail while shown with Charles and John from black.
"judiciary committee" Discussed on The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
"Member of Jerry Nadler's judiciary committee, but this situation with Don Mcgann affects all of the committees, the intelligence community that you're on where you release the Michael Cohen testimony today. I wanna I get your reaction to chairman Landers letter and then we'll talk a little bit about, Michael Collins, testimony. Right. Well chairman Nadler is right. And people need to understand how completely unprecedented, Donald Trump's strategy. Here is you said, at the close of the last segment that he is claiming an absolute right? To say no to the congress. No president in two hundred and forty years of history has ever claimed that Richard Nixon when ordered to turn over the tapes, and the conversations in the Oval Office turned over the tapes of the conversations in the Oval Office, Bill Clinton didn't imagine that he would say, I'm not going to be interviewed by the Starr investigation team. He was interviewed there was a negotiation, but he was interviewed. So look, just as in the case that we were talking about earlier. The president is not on any way shape. Perform on legal ground. And, you know, so Mcgann must show up that is what the law will say. No look, we can have a conversation about executive privilege executive privilege is important in the sense that any president should have the right to believe that the the private conversations. He has with advisors about policy. We'll be protected but remember bottom line when it comes to the law, congress need not recognize executive privilege. No, that's not where we are. We will recognize that. But when you certain executive privilege, you come before the congress, and he'd say, look, I'll talk about everything other than that, which the White House wants to assert executive privilege on. And so that's the right way to do this. But, you know, look at the end of the day, this is going to be just another example of the White House, offering up a completely novel in absurd legal strategy to protect the president and Carson on Michael Cohen. Testimony released today. Here he is very clearly you are in the room when he gave that closed door. Testimony. It's very clearly saying, J Secolo, the president's lawyer told me to say things that were not true to congress. And that's what the accusation of that. He pled guilty to lying to congress was about that testimony. Yeah. And look, let's, let's stipulate that a man who is now in prison for lying to congress is in not your very best witness. But Michael Cohen as is his habit showed up with receipts just as he had canceled check signed by the president to stood to reimburse the payments for stormy Daniels. He has. And I believe they either are or will be released the emails that went back and forth with all of these attorneys, as they were crafting his statement now. Now, remember, it's his statement, and that in and of itself is sort of interesting. Right. Michael Cohen is in jail because he was inaccurate he lied about his statement. His statement was whatever else you think Michael Cohen was created by all sorts of attorneys coming together and offering? Comments. And when you see the transcript is, I suspect, you have you will see that Abbe Lowell is offering up comments about whether he should be talking about vodka Trump. I mean, again, remember this is Michael Cohen statement, and it was drafted by a collection of lawyers on his behalf acting not on Michael Cohen behalf. But acting on in the defense of Donald Trump. Joy Bex, I want to get your response to Jerry Nadler's letter which is the new entry in what is a triple document day. I a memo from the Justice department saying that Don Mcgann has complete immunity from a congressional subpoenas doesn't have to testify. Then the president ordering Don Mcgann not to testify against lawyer, then letter to Jerry Nadler, saying he's going to testify presence say doesn't have to just department says he doesn't have to Jerry Nadler comes back tonight with this very powerful letter filled with legal citation beyond the Justice department citations, first of all the office of legal counsel opinion in my opinion. Is extremely weak. It is built on one thing and one thing only, and that is prior office of legal counsel opinions. There's only reference to one district court opinion. And that one said there is no such thing as absolute immunity. So there is no absolute immunity. Jerry, Nadler's response..
"judiciary committee" Discussed on The Lawfare Podcast
"Shorts. January thirty first two thousand nineteen today. An article that we ran this morning on l'affaire entitled what an old Watergate document can teach the House Judiciary committee by me. The chairman of the house committee on the judiciary faced a vexing problem pressure for impeachment was building. But while lots of evidence against the president was public key pieces of it were not they were rather in the hands of a special prosecutor who didn't work for congress. The prosecutor's job was to prosecute crimes not to evaluate the president's fitness for office that ladder job lay with the chairman and his committee who didn't have access to the prosecutor's evidence. So the House Judiciary committee chairman wrote a letter requesting that the evidence be turned over, quote, the house and the judiciary committee are under control. Rolling constitutional obligation and commitment to act expeditiously in carrying out. Their solemn constitutional duty wrote chairman Peter Regino in a letter dated March eighth nineteen seventy four to John, Sarah. The chief judge of the US district court for the district of Columbia. It was Redeina said the quote committee's view that in constitutional terms. It would be unthinkable if this material were kept from the house of representatives in the course of the discharge of its most awesome, constitutional responsibility, unquote. I have a suggestion for Jerry Nadler, the current occupant of regina's old office he should consider taking a page from his predecessors book and formally requesting a referral of possible impeachment material. Not ler. Circumstances are admittedly a bit different from regina's, but the similarities are striking to and regina's course, suggests a way forward for Nadler that is worth serious consideration it boils down to this if Nadler and his committee want the evidence in the hands of special counsel, Robert Muller that is relevant to their performance of their own constitutional function. They should start by formally asking Muller to refer it to them. I ran across regina's letter in a passing reference in my recent research on the Watergate roadmap. The grand jury report that Watergate special prosecutor Leon Jawara ski referred to the House Judiciary committee in nineteen seventy four specifically Ceric mentioned the letter in his opinion approving the transmission of war skis impeachment referral quote. The House Judiciary committee through its chairman has made a formal request for delivery of the report materials the opinion says a footnote in support of this point footnote number four sites the Rudeina letter specifically along with a hearing transcript the national archive has made both of these documents public and we posted them on law. Fair this morning. Let's acknowledge up front the differences between regina's circumstances and Nadler's regina's committee already had an open impeachment inquiry authorized by nearly unanimous four hundred. Ten to four vote in the house of representatives Nadler's committee by contrast has no open impeachment inquiry. Indeed democratic leaders insist they have no plans to impeach President Trump and are waiting on the evidence from Muller before making any decisions about how to proceed as Nadler himself recently. Put it, quote, we have to see what the Muller report says, unquote. He added we have to get the facts, we will see where the facts lead maybe that will lead to impeachment. Maybe it won't it is much too early unquote. Perhaps more importantly Jawara ski. Unlike Muller was ready to provide material to the house, the Watergate grand jury had specifically prepared the report for purposes of transmitting it to the House Judiciary committee in support of the impeachment inquiry by contrast Muller is keeping things. Very quiet. He presumably doesn't want congressional activity to interfere with his investigation. And he's evidently, not look. To jump start congressional investigations that will want to talk to his witnesses. Indeed, it's not even clear if Muller believes he has information that he would want the House Judiciary committee to examine pursuant to its obligations under the impeachment clauses. So if I sit in short to say that at the present time, neither the supply side, nor the demand side of this equation is as mature as it was in nineteen seventy four. And yet as I say the similarities between the situations strike me as alternately more substantial than the differences for one thing. The structural arrangement is very similar once again, the judiciary committee has the impeachment thority, but not the evidence while the prosecutor has the evidence, but not the authority to think beyond the narrowly criminal in critical respects, the current interational of this problem is actually worse than it was in Watergate back then after all the Senate Watergate committee had done its own extensive investigations key witnesses had testified publicly and the broad parameters of the story were thus known..