For one purpose, that is to cause serious injury. My for one purpose, that is to cause serious injury serious inury. My Recollection Of what ou serious injury. My Recollection Of what you said serious injury. My Recollection Of what you said was serious injury. My Recollection Of what you said was you serious injury. My Recollection Of what you said was you were serious injury. My Recollection Of. What you said was you were literally on the to you, just sitting on the chin, an altercation started, and somebody had a knife . The tube. Yes, unfortunately not that uncommon in london. I think these days it is more prevalent, but london is no stranger to Knife Crime Force that we have a city of 7 million people. There was another stabbing in sheffield. It was with a broken bottle, but there were stabbings, you know, not so much guns, but sharp weapons, they seem to be the Weapons Of Choice just now. I sharp weapons, they seem to be the Weapons Of Choice just now. Weapons of choice ust now.
morning, morning. let s start by looking at the papers. the sunday times front page likely to please labour, their promise not to raise some key taxes will be in the manifesto. the observer goes on the party s pledge to set up specialist courts for rape cases. nigel farage claims to the express that reform, his party, are the real opposition now. many of the papers carry the worrying story about rescue teams search for the missing tv presenter dr michael mosley, who disappeared while on a greek island on wednesday and there will be coverage of that across the bbc through the day but let s with you three, welcome, turn to the election. it s been a busy weekend, john, you ve been watching on for some time, you gave money to the conservatives that backed boris johnson, you seem keir starmer who has been trying to get your support, have you made up your mind? his. has been trying to get your support, have you made up your mind? no, not at all, the have you made up your mind? no,
already turned it back in, so no further search was required. did anyone ever suggest to you that this document may have been destroyed? no. i ve never heard that before. the new york times is reporting tonight that jack smith s team also subpoenaed surveillance footage from bedminster. we know they did so when it comes to mar-a-lago. can you confirm that they did, and when did they subpoena that footage? i m not aware of any subpoenas of footage from bedminster. so you were on the legal team you never received a request or never heard that the trump organization was getting a request for surveillance footage of his bedminster club? it s not something i have any recollection of, no. why do you think prosecutors according to the new york times were interested in this surveillance footage? because you yourself were part of the searches for additional classified documents at additional properties. sure. part of the problem is that when we were trying to work with the d
asked for something that if it exists, we would have already turned it back in, so no further search was required. did anyone ever suggest to you that this document may have been destroyed? no. i ve never heard that before. the new york times is reporting tonight that jack smith s team also subpoenaed surveillance footage from bedminster. we know they did so when it comes to mar-a-lago, can you confirm that they did, and when did they subpoena that footage? i m not aware of any subpoenas and footage from them. so when you are on the legal team, you are never, you ve never received the requests or heard of the trump organization was getting a request for surveillance footage of his bedminster club? it s not something i have any recollection of. why do you think prosecutors, if according to the new york times were interested in this surveillance footage, because you yourself were part of this searches for additional classified documents, at additional properties. sure, pa
doing so. and his testimony questionable. i want to put this in common sense issue, did tony ornato, a liar, is that a sense that he lied to you and he is one of the people that may be a fruitful target of the doj going forward? ultimately, that s up to the department of justice. but i think it s fair to say not every witness was as truthful as they should have been, and could have been. and he definitely falls into that category. we have multiple individuals, as that information will detail, who tell different pieces of that story, that he has that he told us he had no recollection of. so, in the grand process of this had we feel that he was less truthful than many other witnesses. yeah. less truthful. yeah, coming from a mild and very kind man like yourself, that s basically the equivalent of saying liar, liar, pants on fire. and the committee with andrew weissmann that we focused on