And mississippi the former chair of the historic january Six Committee about the second indictment of donald trump. A second or a velshi begins right now. Good morning, and Sunday August the 6th, im ali velshi. Donald trumps legal team has until five pm tomorrow to respond to the governments request for a protective order before it agrees to turn over evidence in the Election Interference Case. The ruling came after a series of motions filed on saturday afternoon and quick succession. Trumps team asked to push the deadline back by three days and to hold a hearing on the matter, which is a sign of how the former president s attorneys are going to try to slow things down, much like the president s past attorneys have done in various other legal matters. Special counsels legal team quickly argued against it, calling that motion unnecessary. Ultimately, judge tanya, the judge appointed to oversee the Election Interference Case denied the trump teams motion for a delay. Her order came less
training status of their personnel or command and control, there is a whole plethora of kinds of information pertaining to a nuclear offense or defense that could be revealed or information could be inferred by exposure of these documents. this is obviously very valuable top secret information. but what is the value of this top secret information to another country? because, you know, only a certain number of countries have nuclear capabilities. well, that s right. it is a fairly small club of nine or ten, depending on if you include north korea or not, i guess. and as i say, this goes to the very core of our nation s existence. and that is why nations pursue and acquire nuclear weapons. it s why we did. it s why russia has and china. it s why north korea has, because it gets to the very existence and how they deter foreign attacks. and so, this in turn is, as i say, the holiest of holy s of secrets. which nation strived very hard to protect and restrict access to, as we
and, or, importantly, the obverse of that is that it could also indicate what we do not know about a foreign nation. which could give them some form of reassurance, particularly if it s an adversary. so, nuclear capabilities, number of weapons, how many are on alert, maintenance status, training status of their personnel or command and control, there is a whole plethora of kinds of information pertaining to a nuclear offense or defense that could be revealed or information could be inferred by exposure of these documents. this is obviously very valuable top secret information. but what is the value of this top secret information to another country? because, you know, only a certain number of countries have nuclear capabilities. well, that s right. it is a fairly small club of nine or ten, depending on if you include north korea or not, i guess. and as i say, this goes to the very core of our nation s existence. and that is why nations pursue and acquire nuclear weapons. i
it crosses the legal threshold when falsehoods are employed to facilitate criminal deeds. samuel double buell, a law professor and former prosecutor, perhaps sums it up best, speaking to the new york times, bill says there is no first amendment privilege for giving directions or suggestions to other people to engage in illegal acts. tony soprano cannot invoke the first amendment for telling his crew he wants someone whacked. special counsel jack smith outlined 21 false the surgeons made by trump that were allegedly used to persuade others to engage in criminal conduct. here is some of the bigger lies noted in the indictment. trump claimed and continues to claim that massive fraud change the outcome of the 2020 election and that he, in fact, one. this remains his overarching big lie, if you, will about the election, despite knowing that this narrative was false. as the indictment points out, numerous senior officials in his administration had told him this was false. he persisted and sp
it changes the ball game so much as we will have a rain delay for a couple of innings. well, i mean, partially he agrees with what jon said, a rain delay in for a couple of innings. but he does not think she got it right. what is your reaction to these comments and what is at stake here? well, i certainly agree with both jon and bill barr that this is a delay, this is a holdout, this is not going to determine any outcomes of the case. in terms of whether the judge got it right or wrong, let me just say this, be wary of any blanket assertions that the judge was absolutely right or absolutely wrong on executive privilege. because the fact of the matter is, we have very little case law to executive privilege. and you will hear people from time to time make assertions like a former president does not have a cannot invoke executive privilege. that is just not right. the supreme court has said there can be narrow circumstances were a former president can invoke executive privilege. this