landfall as a hurricane. ian is moving inland as a post-tropical cyclone. even though it s been downgraded, officials warn it could cause heavy rain, wind, and floods. in south carolina the storm flooded homes and vehicles along the shoreline. you can see in this video high winds pushed the storm surge even higher, and two piers, one in pawleys island and one in myrtle beach both partially collapsed. officials are warning residents to avoid leaving their homes, to steer clear of floodwaters that could pose hidden dangers. the obvious one of the water itself can isolate people, drown people. but it can also hide downed power lines, obstacles in the water, even contaminants in the water. so the waters themselves are the most dangerous. ian slammed into southwest florida as a severe category 4 hurricane on wednesday. it almost became a category 5, packing sustained winds at 150 miles an hour. the storm is now being blamed for at least 45 deaths, though, officials believe t
this would play out before the electorate and whether any opinions or any votes or legislation might change. we ve also been waiting for what the person who obviously seems to be at the center of the committee s attention, former president donald j. trump, wondering what he has to say about all the committee s assertions, and there are a lot of them. like that he was told his scheme was to told overturn the election was in fact illegal, but he pressured his vice president to go along with it anyway. things like he knew that mike pence s life was in danger at the capitol but kept publicly lashing out at him during the attack anyway. well, the wayit seems to be ove because today in his first public appearance since the hearing, he didn t really deny any of that exactly. instead, he admitted he did pressure pence to try to keep him in power. but he did deny one thing. never called mike pence a wimp. i never called him a wimp. mike pence had a chance to be great. he had a chanc
they re waiting to see how this is actually playing out before the electorate or whether any opinions let alone potential votes or legislation might actually change. we ve also been waiting for what the person who obviously seems to be at the center, former president donald trump, what he has to say about all the committee s assertions, and there are a lot of them like that he was told his scheme was to overturn the election was in fact illegal, but he pressured his vice president to go along with it anyway. things like he knew that mike pence s life was in arj at the capitol but kept publicly lashing out at him during the attack anyway. well, the wait seems to be over. in his first public appearance since the hearing he didn t deny any of that exactly. instead he admitted he did pressure pence to try and keep him in power, but he did deny one thing. i never called mike pence a wimp. i never called him a wimp. mike pence had a chance to be great. he had a chance to be, fran
this is not what we ve seen in past courts. even the warren court, the famous period when we got the miranda ruling and brown versus board of education and a lot of other liberal measures, it was done with an eye toward public opinion and making sure the court was seen as legitimate. that s why the brown versus board of education desegregation ruling in 1954 was unanimous. chief justice warren went out of his way to make sure everybody was on board to try to take the country in a different direction. this modern court has no such concerns, and to the extent they want to ram things down people s throats, the public is not going to be very happy a about it. errol louis, unfortunately we re out ofof time. i had a lot more to talk about, but we ll have you back. thank you so much, errol, and we ll be right back. and no w get relief without a pill with tylenol dissolve packs. relief without the wat.
i do want to say i m so glad you brought this one up because everyone is paying attention to abortion and gun rights and religious liberties, but this is a case that at the center of the dispute is the famous, you know, miranda ruling, you have the right to remain silent, you have the right to have a lawyer. but it s not a question of whether you have to have the evidence withheld if you haven t been read miranda rights. it s a question of whether someone who has not been read his miranda rights can bring an individual civil rights action against the officer who failed to do that. it s a side question on it, but during oral arguments on this in april justice kagen said do we really want to diminish this right in any way? do we want to undermine the legitimacy and integrity in any