the more that you talk to people who are close to the president, the more you talk to people who told him something, or heard something for him, the closer you are to proving his intent. but there s a big difference between what he s told and what he knows. you could spend the next month telling me about quantum physics, and you could prove you told it to me that you couldn t prove that i understood it and you know, on one hand i would always talk about how ignorant president trump is, and on the other, do we really expect that he understood the contours of the 1887 electoral counteract, or the 12th amendment? so we re getting closer. and we need to hear from a lot more people who heard directly from president trump. by the way, we ve only heard a small fraction of what the committee knows, and we ve learned nothing about what the department of justice knows other than the cases that it has already brought in federal court. so closer, yes. but dispositive, no, not yet. and we ve seen
statute and the context and facts. and i trust that as members of this committee and the senate as a whole and the general public take the time, which they should do, to give a fair reading to the whole scope and arc and reach of your service that they ll see you as someone who cares deeply about our constitution and the rights that make us free, as you said in your opening statement. your career in the law, your service on the bench, your thoughtful responses to questions put to you, the way you ve maintained your composure all impress me. as i mentioned, i don t think labels such as a judicial philosophy are always that meaningful or dispositive. i think in your case a deep admiration for the constitution and an understanding that the role of a judge is a limited one are critical and qualifying. you opened yesterday by referencing how your parents were educated in racially segregated schools in florida
new government. and the second one is accountability and you just said reflecting on what went wrong and this is not in anyway to diminish the work of this department or anyone else, but you and the administration have said there will be a time and place for that kind of accountability. so, where is the state department in that process? and is this going to be in a format of a formal investigation? what is that going to look like? thank you. thank you. with regard to the government, we have seen different reports of government information and i have not seen anything final or dispositive of that government and who is in it and who is not. so, i m going to reserve judgment and comment until i have seen that. it maybe coming up in the days ahead, but i want comment until
it was lauding fauci s leadership under covid. this paragraph that was all blacked out. and when you read you read the rest, it seemed like it might have been referencing we to do better to crackdown on misleading claims. that s where it seems like that probably would go. just my guess. but that would be dispositive, perhaps, toward your claim that they are colluding together to use their favorite word is a quasi-state actor. are you going to move to try to get that paragraph on blacked out? absolutely. laura: unredacted. get that paragraph unblocked. the thing is there is on a lot of other evidence that the cdc, fauci, and others, nih, worked with these companies to censor things. laura: the legal analyst out there, the tv lawyers, are claiming that this is this is kind of frivolous claim that you have raised.
be dispositive, and this is one example of that. what about criticizing certain practices welcome officials might take into their own hands? maybe some of it might be accidental if they send out a ballot before it was done and increasing, creating more of a criminal penalty, frankly, criminalizing some would argue criminalizing trying to do your job better, if you want to look at it from one perspective. this seems to be almost an attempt to dissuade election officials for doing almost any part of their job for fear of committing an accidental crime. that s another important aspect in some of these laws, that they re directly targeting local election administrators. let s understand the local election administrators were the heroes of the last election. the fact we were able to transform our election structure because of covid and have