continue without the fbi s assistance. now tonight judge cannon has denied that request. she said, basically, tough luck. judge cannon wrote in her order, quote, the court cannot advocate its control over questions of privilege and does not find the government argument sufficiently convincing as presented. not sufficiently convincing, department of justice. there s been no actual suggestion by the government of any identifiable emergency or imminent disclosure of classified information arising from plaintiffs allegedly unlawful retention of the seized property. in other words, she did not agree with the government s argument that her order not only delayed their criminal investigation but, by impeding the parallel intelligence assessment, would harm our national security. and cannon clarified, the fbi s free to participate in the intel assessment. quote, the temporary restraint does not prevent the government from continuing to review and use the materials seized for purposes of intell
obviously weather playing a huge role in this artemis mission. what s the latest? in fact, that 60% is actually going to increase to an 80% likelihood of liftoff without impeding from the weather as that two-hour window succeeds through the course of the day. that s good news, because the next possible wind monday 5th, labor day. edging closer and closer or further and further into the peak of the hurricane season, right? this is on the east coast of the florida peninsula. an area susceptible to tropical storms, of course. but of course the meteorologist locking for every potential weather hazard on launch day, being this morning or this afternoon, i should say. and they have highlighted the two potential violations today, which would be lightning, which they re not allowing liftoff to take place if there is a lightning strike within 30 minutes of launch and within ten nautical miles of cape canaveral. the cumulus clouds, we don t
and delivered to your door in as little as one hour. you numbers today from the arrests as of last monday, at least 825 people have been charged, 225 of them have been charged with assaulting, impeding, or resisting officers, 90 charged with using a deadly or dangerous, weapons 300 and find have pled guilty, and 80 have been sentenced to prison. several of the accused or members of far rights groups. what do you want to call them? give me a name? give me a game? white supremacist. proud boys. proud boys? stand back and stand by. ivory made this comment, enrique tarrio, but leader of the problem by, set on parlor,
section 1507 of the u.s. code title 18 states whoever with the intent of interfering, obstructing, impeding, or in the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness pickets or parades in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than a year or both. why isn t that being adjudicated? well, i think there would be a very serious first amendment challenge if you just arrested people protesting outside the homes of justices. we can all condemn that as we should. harris: there is a law against it. well, the law says that you do it with the intent to interfere with a proceeding to intimidate. if you read that too broadly you could suggest that even protesting in front of the supreme court would trigger that law.