abound. ned, south carolina senior senator lindsey graham was asked about his reaction to the news that john dowd was out. this is what lindsey graham said. these tweets do have legal consequence. i know he s frustrated. i know he believes he s being treated unfairly. but president clinton was under siege legally. and he was able to manage his day job. the more he gets into these food fights with the special counsel, the less effective he will be i think as commander in chief. ned what do you make of what we just heard there from senator graham? that s absolutely right. going back to danny s point. this really isn t a negotiation. the special counsel s team holds all the cards. it s really a matter of a comb days on the part of the trump team. and a decision. do you sit the president for an interview or do you not? in addition to what lindsey graham said today there was another south carolina law maker who said something about john dowd over the weekend. he told john dowd famou
welker, thank you. ned price is an national security analyst. danny sevelos is an msnbc legal analyst. this reshuffling of the legal team tells you what? to an outside observer, it seems that trump has gotten rid of his sort of doj veterans like john dowd, people who are more inclined to try to negotiate with the special counsel. and he s bringing in people who might instead try to be more aggressive and maybe not be likely to agree to things with special counsel mueller. here s the thing we need to remember. this is not a business negotiation with abc corporation where you can walk away from the table if you don t like the terms. this is the doj. this is the special counsel. they don t have any risk the way a corporation does in a private litigation. if they don t like their answer, their offers are take it or leave it. they will subpoena him if he does not agree to sit down.
to pay $760 million to thousands of people who either were directly affected by the concussions or those down the line of lineage of the players who might have been affected. that judge said, i m association b sorry, but that s not enough money to cover all the people and all the damage. i m joined by our guest, an attorney would hho has handled hundreds of class action lawsuit. also the consumer president of attorneys of california. my first question to you is this, if the other lawsuits, some 4,500 people i think were covered in that lawsuit, or at least not covered but were named in that lawsuit, if that is a class action lawsuit, wouldn t you think dan marino would be covered by it? anybody in the nfl affected could have joined that class action. why does he need to do this? absolutely, dan marino would be part of that class. but i think dan marino is a
and commentator mel robbins and cnn legal analyst danny sevelos. a lot of people are talking about this one very specific issue and that s the notification of congress before transferring gitmo prisoners. it seems very simple, and yet it s becoming very complicated. is this just a technicality or is it something far greater than that? well, the question, of course, becomes, has the president complied with the statute? and it appears that he hasn t complies with the direct language of the statute. but the larger question is, is this statute, in fact, the applicable law? because under the constitution, the constitution itself is the supreme law of the land. if the president has the constitutional authority to conduct an authority, then congress can t deny him that authority by simply passing a statute. so this is one of those situations in which we have a law in which the constitution
years behind bars. you can see one of the suspect s fathers, the look on his face as he leaves court, overcome with emotion, weeping, and his little girl could be locked up until she s 77 years old. again, she s 12. they re all 12. want to bring in cnn commentator mel robbins and cnn legal analyst and criminal defense attorney danny sevelos. both of you, fair to say, have never been faced with a client like this or a crime like this. i don t know i ve ever reported on anything this bizarre. effectively, you re looking at 12-year-old kids being elevated into an adult system. there s so many questions to start with. how about just this, miranda warnings. if those parents weren t anywhere around when those kids started telling those stories, do any of those stories come into court? good question. i ve had this happen to me so many times and people would be surprised to learn that