Ident richard nixon. Protects more than 1600 plant and animal species, californi nnqottorney general quickly vowed to fight the Trump Administrations move in court. The ve next day, california joined 29 states and cities in a lawsuit against another trump m8fyh aonenviro regu5 zhons, obamaera rnrestrictions on coal g power plants. Kevin and dan who join o welcome. Thank you. Qdangered species act change. Whais at stake for california when the federal government move s in like this. ww nit is a huge deal. And gea deal for the state of california. Species alive, the condor, the grizzly bear, what it t is talked about is how it effects the osystems of california. We have more plants on the endangered lista han animals. Huge deal. And california has more endangered species than any other state be sides hawaii. Ourr is f land. Even though california might have strong laws, you know, a lot of the places in the state are not covered under these ro ctions that we have. Dan, one thing that b
Lawyers, lawyers donts play fair. They argue two things. They can argue, look, the person didnt do the crime. The person wasnt guilty. But usually in a political scandal the argument is there wasnt enough proof to find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Very high standard. Its not theyre blameless, its not theyre innocent. But we say wed rather let 100 guilty go free than convict one innocent man. So were were loading it to a very high standard. The other thing that lawyers argue, which the public sometimes has trouble with, is procedure. If you didnt get that evidence into the courtroom properly, then it cant come in. If you didnt share exculpatory information properly with defense, those are procedural violations which can equally invalidate a verdict. And im happy to argue both. So, thats thats kind of what were going to go through. One word from last week. Last week was the allure of the white house tapes. And i went through a bunch of them with you, perhaps too fast. What i fi
President richard nixon. Protects more than 1600 plant and animal species, californi nnqottorney general quickly vowed to fight the Trump Administrations move in court. The very next day, california joined 29 states and cities in a lawsuit against anothetrump m8fyh aonenviro regu5 zhons, obamaera restrictions onpocoal burning r plants. Kevin and dan who join o welcome. Thank you. Qdangered species act change. What is at stake for california when the federal government move s in like this. ww nit is a huge deal. And a huge deal for the state of california. Species alive, the condor, the grizzly bear, what it is not talked about is how it effects the ecosystems of california. We have more plants onthe endangered list than animals. A huge deal. And california has more endangered species than any other statbe sides hawaii. Our is even though california might have strong laws, you know, a lot of the places in the state are not covered undthese protections that we have. Dan, one thing tha
President richard nixon. Protects more than 1600 lant and animal species, necaliforni nnqottorney ral quickly vowed to fight the Trump Administrations move in court. The very next day, california joined 29 states and cities in a lawsuit against another ru m8fyh aonenviro regu5 zhons, obamaera restrictions on coal burning power plants. Kevin and dan who join e. welc thank you. Qdangered species act ange. Veat is at stake for california when the federal ment move s in like this. ww nit is a huge deal. And a huge deal or the state of california. Species alive, the condor, the z y bear, what it is not talked about is hoit effects the ecosystems of california. The ave more plants on endangered list than animals. A huge and california has more endangered species than any other state be ides hawaii. Our is federal land. Even though california might have strong laws, you know, a lot of the laces in the state are not covered under these protections that we have. Dan, one thing that bu critic
You need to understand lawyers, lawyers do not play fair they argue two things. They can argue look, the person did not do the crime, the person was not guilty. Usually in a political scandal, the argument is that there wasnt enough proof to find them guilty belonged beyond a reasonable doubt, its not that they were blameless, its not that they were innocent. But you know we say, we would rather let 100 guilty go free, then convict one innocent man. So we are loading it to a very high standard. The thing that lawyers argue with the public sometimes and has trouble with this procedure. If you didnt get that evidence into the courtroom properly. Then it cant come in. If you didnt share the scope information properly with the defense, those are procedural violations which can equally invalidate a verdict. And im happy to argue both, that is kind of what we are going to go through. One word from last week, last week was the allure of the white house tape and i went through a bunch of them