Calling for cameras in the courtroom. When trump goes to trial. Plus, he didnt come out in force the throne predicted. Supporters were at his arraignment. They were not alone. We are here in washington d. C. , trump is about to be indicted for the third time this year. How do you feel about that . I dont feel very good about that. The good liar will join later this hour to share their experience talking to the dont face well at their arraignment. It includes one persons anatomically difficult suggestion to one of them. Fallout from the January 6th Insurrection is not just putting out in courtrooms, it is having an economic impact. Sided as a reason for a major financial downgrade this week. That comes even a new job numbers showed increasingly solder Economic Science that bidenomics is working. Last month, we created 187,000 new jobs. Americas Economic Future looks bright. President biden and i will keep fighting to move our nation forward. Also ahead, medical breakthrough, the first p
that the special counsel use which clearly states that trump s crimes do not relate to free speech in the first amendment, but rather to his explicit actions intended to disrupt the electoral process, in number of votes in the gop do not see new putting that together. this is an attack on free speech and political advocacy. there is nothing more protected under the first amendment and political speech. that is what this is about. they are trying to criminalize the attorney client relationship. they are trying to criminalize exercising the first amendment. it is a rehashing of a bunch of a first amendment protected activity. describing things that the president said in the. these are all constitutionally protected activity in which four husband trump engaged. political activities and free speech protected by the first amendment. now, it is actually not. i want to bring back constitutional tierney, andrew lead, talk more about this. the memory directly from this
indictment. then have you talk about it. jack smith writes this in the indictment, the defendant had the right, like every american, to speak publicly about the election. even a claim, falsely, that there have been outcome determinative fraud during the election. and that he had one. what he did not have the right to do, andrew, was to take action to stop the certification of the election. talk us through the distinction here. why it is that these political voices feel as if they can mount this defense of the first amendment? yasmin, you are reading paragraph three which is a mirror of what jack smith said when he gave his press conference after. no one is trying to take away anyone s freedom of speech. in fact, the indictment reads that he could falsely claim that there was outcome determinative fraud even when there wasn t any. how do we know that this is nonsense? this entire argument is nonsense? republicans love scalia.
Российские парламентарии высказались о защите русских за рубежом: за кого голосовать? pravda.ru - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from pravda.ru Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.