guilty of first and second-degree manslaughter. and i promise we are going to end this show on a happy note with moments of joy. and the real santa, the real one. so stick around for that. but we begin the reidout tonight with a status report on the american public. 2021, the year that was supposed to make up for 2020 has been a roller coaster, to put it mildly. it started with a limited audience capacity ball drop in times square, followed five days later by a violent attack on our nation s capitol. not by foreign terrorists, but by american ones. they even brought a noose to lynch mike pence with. and from the moment we saw these scenes of hundreds of screaming, in some case violent insurrectionists storming the capitol on january 6, defecating on the ground, beating capitol police with their own shields, we knew that nothing would ever be the same. for the first time in 245 years of u.s. history, a defeated president of the united states had refused to leave office with
range. when the fire extinguisher runs out, he chucks it at them. at the police officers who were under siege. he touch accent as hard as he can. and one of the astounding things about this video, and that guy in it, is that for more than two months after the insurrection, that guy was not arrested. the fbi had his face on a wanted poster, but it did not even identified him. even despite that jacket that you could not miss. it was online sleuths working from, home sifting through hours an hours of footage, who actually figured out who this guy was. when reporters ryan reilly ingesting cook of unaware that the fbi was looking for him. and he confirmed that yes, it was him. robert scott palmer of clearwater florida. in the eye catching flak jacket he told the reporters that the biden administration was trying to vilify the patriots and quote. who were involved in the riot but the reporters notice that he seemed to grow increasingly and she says the call continued. i didn t do
fundamental shift but also e-r reñú implications of a rulinguvú2-ix thiìc% thiìc% åhs added this caveat,ç7 it remainso be seen what exactlyz:n supr court doesem rule,e victor. !wigp jdtq) q,pecting tocñpz son kaitly.n rpeaking in0 because she s in theqfñ roomórs waiting for the president, to talk aboute4)+ñ javelin missile going to ukraine. c here he comesñe: now. we ll get to hisñe remarks. let s bring in cnnybñdw?z repor ariane de vogue. this draft opinion irñ+ hi d eñ how supreme court. it s a thelu[most 45 called6u[m stare nhrar]ah9%w;wyo÷ó[l covi@)+b; te 6!gwl justice sonia7ódm sotomay pushing back, why arew9t7aú we suddenly now reversing roe v. wade3añd orq years. she said some peoplue to say it s because we veatipñe suddenly had an ?z2dinflux of conservatives appointed to the court. i have to jump inñod, here.u i have to jump inñod, here.u we re going to back ) alabama, presiderçiñwviñwvyñ7rg -k a lou plant. @tñ: me, andd make a2ynpst�
and two new omicron variants found in more than a dozen states, as covid cases begin to rise once again. good morning. and welcome to way too early, on this tuesday, may 3rd. i m jonathan lemire. in a potentially ground-breaking shift in american constitutional law, the supreme court appears poised to strike down the landmark roe v. wade decision. according to a leaked draft opinion, published last night, by politico, a majority of the supreme court is prepared to overturn the federal right to abortion. the leak of the 98-page document is unprecedented in the court s modern history. the draft opinion was reportedly offered by justice samuel alito, and circulated back in february. alito writes in part this. ro ex was egregiously wrong from the start. its reasoning was exceptionally weak and the decision has had damaging consequences. it is time to heed the constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people s elected representatives. nbc news has not obtained or
abortion, the moment of supreme court would rule against roe. half the country has anti-abortion republican state legislatures and governors who might do the same. president biden made his comments at joint base andrews on his way to alabama in the last hour. the idea that concerns me a great deal that we re going to, after 50 years, a woman does not have a right to choose within the limits of the supreme court decision is number one. even more equally profound is the rationale used. it will mean every other decision regarding privacy is thrown into question. the rationale of the decision as released, were it to be sustained, a whole range of rights are in question, a whole range of rights. the idea with letting the states make those decisions would be a fundamental shift in what we have done. it goes far beyond, in my view, if it becomes a law and if what is written is what remains, it goes far beyond the concern of whether or not there s the right to choose. if this decis