maybe we can get some positive rulings to throw out votes in some counties or change this or that. and we need to have this slate of electors in place so that the courts can rule potentially in our favor. the problem is that the courts don t rule in their favor and they reject this. the lawyers in wisconsin than write an analysis of what could be done in other states and they even say that some other states states laws are not as permissive to this idea of alternate electors as wisconsin and they say some are problematic or even dicey. but the trump campaign goes ahead with this plot anyway. and they start pushing these slates of fake electors in other states as well. because they have lost in the courts and now they will take this matter before mike pence and hope you will do what we ll not in congress. so, at the times, we have been investigating the origins, the different tentacles of trump s
are working on the trump campaign s legal fight there to try to sway the will of the voters into donald trump s camp. so, the voters in wisconsin chose joe biden. donald trump did not want to accept that. so, they were exploring different legal theories for how they could try to contest the election. one of them is to put forward what they call an alternate slate of electors. so, they are arguing a vote count is still closed. maybe we can get some positive rulings to throw out votes in some counties or change this or that. and we need to have this slate of electors in place so that the courts can rule potentially in our favor. the problem is that the courts don t rule in their favor and they reject this. the lawyers in wisconsin then write an analysis of what could be done in other states and they even say that some other states states laws are not as
far with a half-throated defense of the challenger s position. and really strong opposition from justices kagan and the chief justice, basically saying, who are we as courts to decide this massive thing? so at this point in the argument, i would say the biden focus should folks should feel pretty good, but the biden lawyer hasn t stood up and argued yet. that will start in about ten minutes. thank you for keeping us informed on that. appreciate it. we ll take a short break and be right back. you re watching jose diaz-balart reports. ht back. you re watching jose diaz-balart reports. afib not caused by a heart valve problem. so if there s a better treatment than warfarin i ll go after that. eliquis. eliquis reduces stroke risk better than warfarin and has less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis has both. don t stop taking eliquis without talking to your doctor as this may increase your risk of stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don t take eliqu
me. ron, break this all down for us, what does this mean? we had this problem last month. there are two surveys that the labor department employs to determine the unemployment rate and the number of jobs created. what we ve seen lately is that the number of corporations participating in the survey has fallen off dramatically and those who did participate more than half don t turn in their numbers on time. so this payroll number that you re looking at is becoming less reliable. when they survey households, it was shown that over 600,000 jobs were added, resulting in that big drop in the unemployment rate. and we ve also seen wages tick higher by .6% last month. on its face, the report looks weaker than anticipated, but in reality, it s probably stronger than anyone realizes at the moment. alarming that the black unemployment rate would go up to 1.7%. don t have an explanation for that and there s a lot of noise in the data. so it s hard on a month-to-month basis to look at, you kn
he said, you know, courts don t have expertise in this area. so by that reasoning, the same thing should obviously be true here, that the court don t have epidemiology and, you know, expertise or anything like that. and when the president says, hey, i need to do this, you know, you would think roberts would defer. the question is, is that enough? there are only three justices appointed by democratic presidents, all of them have signaled that they would uphold a mandate like this, but that only leads to four votes. and you need five at the supreme court. so then folks will be watching justices kavanaugh and barrett in particular, who have been, i think, somewhat more deferential when it comes to claims of public safety. so we ll watch them closely to see whether there are five justices to uphold president biden s mandate. and neal, just i want to kind of take you back inside the courtroom, because you ve been there, right? i mean, it s far different and you did kind of list some o