nato application to be ratified, it is making preparations for the border with russia. i will talk to the foreign finish minister what he thinks putin s next move will be. but first, here is my take. ron desantis emailed me and hundreds of thousands of others i imagine. our country is currently facing a great threat he began. i assume that with inflation soaring, gas prices still sky high and the economy in danger of slowing down, he would hit hard on those themes. but these bread and butter issues were not mentioned anywhere in the email. a new enemy has emerged from the shadows that seeks to destroy and intimidate their way to transform the state and country you and i would hardly recognize. as you might by now have guessed, this enemy is the radical enemy vigilante. some of this is a clever effort to tap into the base of the republican party and out flank donald trump on the kinds of issues that propelled trump into the republican nomination in 2016. and the reason new h
A news show featuring the top headlines of the day from pop culture to politics, which are discussed by a rotating panel of four women and one man. A news show featuring the top headlines of the day from pop culture to politics, which are discussed by a rotating panel of four women and one man. Lets go to doug mcelway, live with the news with a. Great to see you. Brittian had long ago come to the conclusion that russia used a nerf agent to poison the two. It was only yesterday that the State Department officially concurred, promising to impose new sanctions. The sanctions will take effect later this month and are believed to include denying russian licenses for the purposes of exports among other things. The any sanctions follow the Trump Administration order last march to expand 60 russian diplomats, the largest expulsion in history and close the russian consulate in washington. Russia vehemently denied the poisoning. Connecting new sanctions to these events in salisbury is unacceptab
do absent congressional action. the 14th amendment section 5 says it s congress that shall enforce the 14th amendment through appropriate legislation. what we know is a that means in some cases we need congress to pass a law before judges can step in and enforce the provisions of the amendment. so again, i m happy to say there could be a law that says here s how you exclude a president, but i don t think without a law a judge, especially a state court judge, can exclude him. never before have we seen state court judges excludeing even state s officers without some authorizing legislation from the state. so this is a principle about limiting the scope of judicial power. it s not a principle about limbing the reach of the constitution. you argued and published for medium. i m going to put up what you published. you said the decision to remove trump would have none of these
to terms of usage. what kind of legal problems might that cause yeah, so i think it s going to be really challenging to sustain this against a first amendment challenge because it s not like signing a contract or like driving or like smoking the other things that using social media has been analogized to because kids have first amendment rights under the instituti constitution and in a case in 2011, they tried to ban everyone under 18 from using violent video games, unless they got parental consent kids have rights to express themselves, even through the use of playing video games, which is less obviously than going into social media and talking and listening, and that the state hadn t met the very very high burden of excludeing them from that forum, so the technology is
exclude those messages at trial. joining me now is the reporter behind it, jeremy peters jeremy, excludeing these international messages, why? well, fox lawyers and they ve hired an army of them. some of the best and most expensive in the country, are going to move to exclude as much evidence as they possibly can ahead of a trial now, of course, it s up to the judge ultimately to decide what text messages, what parts of these depositions get included none of that is to say that this isn t an exceptionally strong case that dominion has against fox news lawyers, first amendment experts i ve spoken to consistently for months and months before they knew what was in the depositions and what was in the discovery have told me this is one of the strongest defamation cases they