You can also send us a text at washington journal, we will be happy to read that as well. Please leave your name and where you are writing from. I text 202 7488003. You can post a comment on facebook and twitter. Here is a look at the website of the newspaper out of tupelo, mississippi. Trumpave this headline, takes strike at impeachment inquiry. A big rally that ran about an hour and a half. President donald trump unleashed an aggressive show of oratorical force fighting friday night in mississippi. [video clip] yesterday the democrats voted to potentially nullify the votes of 63 million americans, disgracing themselves and bringing shame upon the house of representatives. They have been plotting to overthrow the election since the moment i won, but the people here that are highly sophisticated no long before i won. 19 minutes after i took the oath of office, the horrible newspaper, fake Washington Post declared the campaign to impeach President Trump has just begun. At least they gav
Covered the coverup trial. I understand people were convicted. But you need to understand that lawyers, lawyers donts play fair. They argue two things. They can argue, look, the person didnt do the crime. The person wasnt guilty. But usually in a political scandal the argument is there wasnt enough proof to find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Very high standard. Its not theyre blameless, its not theyre innocent. But we say wed rather let 100 guilty go free than convict one innocent man. So were were loading it to a very high standard. The other thing that lawyers argue, which the public sometimes has trouble with, is procedure. If you didnt get that evidence into the courtroom properly, then it cant come in. If you didnt share exculpatory information properly with defense, those are procedural violations which can equally invalidate a verdict. And im happy to argue both. So, thats thats kind of what were going to go through. One word from last week. Last week was the allure of
Lawyers, lawyers donts play fair. They argue two things. They can argue, look, the person didnt do the crime. The person wasnt guilty. But usually in a political scandal the argument is there wasnt enough proof to find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Very high standard. Its not theyre blameless, its not theyre innocent. But we say wed rather let 100 guilty go free than convict one innocent man. So were were loading it to a very high standard. The other thing that lawyers argue, which the public sometimes has trouble with, is procedure. If you didnt get that evidence into the courtroom properly, then it cant come in. If you didnt share exculpatory information properly with defense, those are procedural violations which can equally invalidate a verdict. And im happy to argue both. So, thats thats kind of what were going to go through. One word from last week. Last week was the allure of the white house tapes. And i went through a bunch of them with you, perhaps too fast. What i fi
You need to understand lawyers, lawyers do not play fair they argue two things. They can argue look, the person did not do the crime, the person was not guilty. Usually in a political scandal, the argument is that there wasnt enough proof to find them guilty belonged beyond a reasonable doubt, its not that they were blameless, its not that they were innocent. But you know we say, we would rather let 100 guilty go free, then convict one innocent man. So we are loading it to a very high standard. The thing that lawyers argue with the public sometimes and has trouble with this procedure. If you didnt get that evidence into the courtroom properly. Then it cant come in. If you didnt share the scope information properly with the defense, those are procedural violations which can equally invalidate a verdict. And im happy to argue both, that is kind of what we are going to go through. One word from last week, last week was the allure of the white house tape and i went through a bunch of them
Counsel of a newspaper. In fact, i dont know of any precedent for this but david mccraw is not just any deputy general counsel. Hes the newsroom lawyer for the New York Times where he has worked for a decade and a half now. That means he gets to do a lot of interesting and stressfulthings. He gets to defend the times against actual and threatened suits, advise reporters on stories, file suits seeking government documents, hidden from view and work for the release of journalists kidnapped by extremists or detained by hostile governments. As david says in the first chapter of his book truth in our times, its been a hell of a time to be a lawyer for the new yorktimes. David gained notoriety himself after the fall of 2016 in the waning days of the president ial campaign. The times had published an article about two women who said from and groped them. A lawyer for trump to manage our attraction and threatened to sue for libel. David responded with a letter that suggested trumps reputation