doesn t that expand the full range of who could be compelled to talk, why they could be compelled to talk, and just the nature of the investigation? oh, very much so. it is, as you said, actually a more significant ruling than the archivist in the january 6th committee. it is pretty much a reaffirmation in the cases against nixon that a president s criminal conduct is outside the bounds of the executive privilege and a president cannot assert a privilege to assert investigation of his alleged criminal activity. this has implications both for the january 6th committee s legislative investigation and i think more importantly, for the department of justice s investigation. to take but one example. i suspect strongly they were waiting on this decision in order to make a determination whether or not to bring the contempt charges against mark meadows for failing to testify. with this decision, meadows has
more breaking news we re following, a very unusual twist in sarah palin s lawsuit against the new york times. the judge says, he said it a short time ago, he s going to dismiss the case even though the jury will resume deliberating tomorrow. the chief media correspondent, brian stelter is joining with us the latest. this is a win for the new york times. tell us what happened. it is. the new york times is saying that this ruling is a reaffirmation of a fundamental tenet of american law that public figures should not be permitted to use libel suits to punish or intimidate news organizations that may acknowledge and swiftly correct unintentional errors. the new york times says it wrote an editorial on sarah palin that was an honest mistake. wasn t on purpose. sarah palin s lawyers have been
says that the u.s. offered some sort of moratorium on ukraine s membership in nato but then said immediately that s a reaffirmation of u.s. positions. he s not interested. he continues to command no nato for ukraine ever and by the way, it seems no more nato members regardless going forward. what s the path to diplomacy if that is the position if of the russian leader? if that s his position, then there isn t much of a path available and he knows it. he knows that the united states and nato are never going to accept those terms. we feel that it is a value of ours that countries get to decide their own destiny, that larger more powerful nations that are their neighbors don t get to decide who they associate with, how they enter selective security agreements. that s not for vladimir putin to decide. you know, i have to say, jim, i m skeptical given the completely unreasonable,
over nord vstream and germany ad so on so forth. i think his dream was to rekindle a kind of world in which he would strengthen his position around belarus and ukraine and create this antagonistic relationship with the west. and ultimately, it is not just the solidarity of the west that has caught him by surprise. it is this extraordinary reaffirmation of multilateralism that we have been witnessing with leaders from across the planet, including japan, speaking out in support of ukraine. and and that is something that he could not have anticipated. yeah. and you make a good point because, you know, we expected sanctions. but some countries have gone a lot further than many expected. i mean, germany s a great example of that. um, others, too. what what does that tell you about just how angry most of the world is at vladimir putin and how isolated that makes him? yeah. well, when you especially look at the european context and i
the ground, that he met in person with european leaders, nato leaders, traveled to poland, met with displaced peoples, and was able to experience that emotion and tension around this absolutely crucial moment. the reaffirmation of the multilateral order, of the importance of nato, an organization which, let s not forget, former president trump has described as being obsolete. all of those together were absolutely crucial. for me what was one of the most important moments in this speech and it was a departure from the state of the union address just a few weeks ago was the way in which he explained to people the importance of fighting for these democratic principles and that we have to steel ourselves for the long fight ahead. in other words, that these principles involve all of us. they are principles that are worth fighting for and a dynamic process and things that one wakes up for every single day thinking about. just hearing the president say that, those words, reassuring