those are the only three words spoken by donald trump s codefendant walt nauta in miami today in an arraignment hearing that lasted only five minutes. walter replied yes, your honor, when judge edwin torres asked him if he had read the charges against him and consulted with an attorney. the delay in walt nauta s arraignment occur because washington-based attorney, stanley woodward, took three weeks to find a local florida lawyer who would join the defense team as required by florida rules. walt nauta s local florida lawyer is a least experienced lawyer in the case and has never handled high pressure federal litigation. the new york times reports of the 34-year-old lawyer, sasha dadan, his limited experience with the federal courts. her name doesn t appear at all in pace, or the nationwide database federal cases. but she has handled numerous local cases in fort pierce, florida. that is where judge aileen mercedes cannon, who is overseeing mr. trump s prosecution, is based and
lawyer is the least experienced lawyer in the case and has never handled high pressure federal litigation. the new york times reports that the 34-year-old lawyer, sasha dadan, quote, has limited experience with the federal courts. her name doesn t appear at all in pacer the nationwide database federal cases. but she has handled numerous local cases in fort pierce, florida. that is where judge aileen mercedes cannon, who is overseeing mr. trump s prosecution, is based and where the former president s trial with mr. nauta will eventually be held. ms. dadan has been active in republican politics mounting an unsuccessful campaign for the florida house in 2018. the application for search warrant of trump s florida home, that reveals that before he was codefendant walt nauta, the justice department and fbi referred to him as witness five. the revelation came after judge bruce ryan how reinhart unredacted more sentences of the affidavit used by the justice department to obtain a s
evening. now it s time to last word with jonathan kaye pot in for lawrence. good evening, jonathan. good evening, alex. quite the day we ve had today. i know you re gonna have a great show analyzing what went. down yes, we will. alex, thank you very much. have a great show. this is not a normal court. that was what president biden said after the radical conservatives on the supreme court, for the second time in two years, reversed nearly 50 years of precedent on an issue that has significantly helped improve the lives of americans. last year it was undoing protections for women to make decisions about their own reproductive health. today it s undoing the consideration of race in college admissions, which has let helped level educational opportunities for minority students, like me. 30 years or so ago. it is a court that is looking to move the country backwards. as president biden told msnbc s nicole wallace earlier today. it s done more to unravel basic rights and
court, for the second time in two years, reversed nearly 50 years of precedent on an issue that has significantly helped improve the lives of americans. last year it was undoing protections for women to make decisions about their own reproductive health. today it s undoing the consideration of race in college admissions, which has let helped level educational opportunities for minority students, like me. 30 years or so ago. it is a court that is looking to move the country backwards. as president biden told msnbc s nicole wallace earlier today. it s done more to unravel basic rights and basic decisions than any court in recent history. and that s what i meant by not normal. i find it just so out of sorts with the basic value system of the american people. and i think across the board the vast majority of the american people don t agree with a lot of the decisions this court is making. he s right. it s not just of the radical conservative supreme court is undoing decades o
plagues our citizenry. with let them eat cake obliviousness, today the majority pulls the rip cord and announces color blindness for all by legal fiat. but deeming race in relevant in law does not make it so in life. the best it can be said of the majority perspective is that it proceeds ostrich like from the hope the preventing consideration of race will and racism. but if that is its motivation, the majority proceeds in vain. if the colleges of this country are required to ignore a thing that matters, it will not just go away. it will take longer for racism to leave us. and ultimately ignoring race just makes it matter more.