that he was pushing back at times according to some of the antidotes but he was largely pushing back against some of the people surrounding president trump, and less against president trump himself. so, it s hard to know whether that moniker of yesper, was really accurate. enough thing i d point out about mark yesper, he came in as the secretary of the army and then of course we had secretary mattis who was fired in december after secretary yesper had been at the helm of the army for a number of months. it was widely known that mark esper basically lobbied or campaign for the job to be secretary of defense. at that point, president trump had been in office for sometime, for more than a year it was well known sort of how he operated, how s administration operated. and yet mark esper still want to take over the pentagon serve as the cabinet secretary under president trump s administration. so, you know he knew he was when he was getting into, and
it s a republicans would like us to talk about the league, we re talking about your life, the way the life of women in our country and how we have again a calibration of all of this in roe v. wade and how we must have it be enshrines as the law of the land. so, this afternoon sticker nancy pelosi laid up the challenges facing democrats, approached roe world, what the party can take to protect that women across the country to make sure the conservative justices on the supreme court cannot continue to peel away hard earned freedoms in this country. next week senate democrats will hold a vote to codify roe as settled law, it seems clear at this point at least, they lack the vote to pass the measure without breaking the filibuster. now earlier this week, house intelligence committee chair adam schiff advocated a
solution that they at this point has come from the parties both progressive members. he tweeted out quote, codifying roe isn t enough, we must expand the court. but are suggestions like this simply wishful thinking, or is there actually something tangible that democrats can and should do. megan hatch her remains, democracy policy at indivisible opera festival brian fallon is the executive judicial advocacy group, demand justice, he s a former senate aide to senator chuck schumer and a former director of the public affairs in the doj president obama. great to have you with us. realistically here, brian, let s start with you what can democrats do between now and the supreme court s official decision to try and firm abortion rights across the country? i think it s important to understand that we can find yourself in a situation overnight, this is been a decades long project of the
succeeded in building an individual point in their party over the last three or four years, that s in many ways an issue voters in this suppression of abortion, and for the longest time we ve seen in polls over the last several years, that the general public will strongly support abortion rights, strongly support the role ruling, didn t believe it was truly at risk. they believed some of the rhetoric was over needed, and now we ve arrived at the moment where i think a lot of people are god smacked that this is truly happening, i don t think they should be, but there is gonna be an awakening in this country. but again, i don t think that democratic candidates for office can assume that that, that that outrage in that shop will translate necessarily into mobilized, in november. unless they clearly articulate that they have a solution, i think that meghan s absolutely right, with leaders come out and campaign for emily cuellar, who is a vote on the henry side of the issue it sends mixin
right. between his decision and the early federal report decision rejecting greens effort to block our lawsuit, these two decisions really validated our legal theory in this case and others in every respect. the judge accepted that if she engaged in insurrection and she s disqualified under the 14th amendment, he recognize that if she s disqualified that is grounds to exclude or from the ballot, he rejected arguments that will lead to a criminal conviction before she could be disqualified. and excluded and he agreed with us that we did not need to show that she engaged personally in any violent act, we only needed to show that she engaged in some voluntary act to aid or assist the insurrection. so, so far so good but it s on that last point, and applying that standard the judge he rejected for example the evidence which he said that the