Zelenskys inauguration in may, i believe you testified it was one of the largest delegations . I believe it was. I cant be 100 sure. I believe it was the Largest National delegation. Okay. And included in the delegation was Secretary Perry . Secretary perry, ambassador sondland, myself, senator ron johnson was there and also the charge daffaires at the u. S. Embassy at the time, joe pennington. We talked a little bit this morning, but president zelenskys inauguration came together rather quickly . It did. I believe we had about three days notice in which to put the delegation together. Theres been some discussion whether the Vice President was going to be able to lead that effort and as it turned out he was not able to lead it. Do you have any information as to why the Vice President was unable to join . I dont. And mr. Morrison, do you have any information as to why the
Vice President was unable to participate in the delegation . No. Ambassador volker, you testified during your deposi
front line of the border crisis will join president biden as he announcess action on the border. it could be restricted if daily crossings exceed a daily average of 2,500. it comes months after a bipartisan senate bill advances which would tighten the border. if daily encounters reached a seven-day average of 5,000. joining me now, doug nichols, mayor of yuma, arizona, invited to the white house today, but had a scheduling issue. we appreciate you being here, mr. mayor. i know you supported the border bill that failed in the senate. for the biden administration that offered major concessions to get that bill, this is where they landed. so, let me just ask you, bottom line. will this make the difference or be a start for cities like yours? the border, bipartisan border bill, was a good start. that s what i was supportive of.
missing another important signature, and that is the chief of the probation department for the district of delaware, she did not sign off on it. they said, therefore, it did not go into effect. it s not binding. both points of you are before the judge. again, as i said, she didn t like this deal. we re waiting to see what she s going to do next. anderson? do you know if it was intentional the probation head they hadn t signed it? was it a scheduling issue? do we know why that hadn t been signed? there are new additional details about that in the filing. they do you say they did continue to try and work out the deal even after the judge adjourned for the day. prosecutors did not agree with it. they were pretty close to this deal in court, and the judge had questions. it s not clear if because she didn t officially stamp it that procedurally stopped it from going to the probation office. that could be one of the issues. they have not elaborated on that. it s not clear if it was bec
there would have to be some communication before this moves forward. ,, . ~ communication before this moves forward. ,, ., . ., forward. sian weir, former federal prosecution - forward. sian weir, former federal prosecution is - forward. sian weir, former federal prosecution is still| forward. sian weir, former i federal prosecution is still on the line with us, on the point that anthony max, how much co ordination with their be between these legal teams before the indictment? it would mostl as before the indictment? it would mostly as anthony before the indictment? it would mostly as anthony said - before the indictment? it would mostly as anthony said be - before the indictment? it would mostly as anthony said be a - mostly as anthony said be a scheduling issue, they could theoretically co ordinate a lot, they could have co ordinated beforehand because especially parallel federal and state investigations are happening where they are working together, that is not apparently the case
the magistrate judge, at what time does her role and the judge take over, and when does the judge set a trial date? this will probably be all that happens in front of the magistrate judge. from here on out it should be the district court judge. you would usually want to get the parties in quickly, within a few weeks, especially where time is of the essence like this. and that scheduling issue is going to be so important. you know, karen s right, this is a procedural formalistic process. if you ve been through countless as we have, you tend to take it for granted. there s a larger purpose which is to remind the participants and maybe us that this is a different format. this is a different this is separate and apart from politics, this is separate and apart from all the noise. ultimately it comes down to that well, the evidence, the judge, the jury. that s by design. that s how criminal courts are supposed to function. yes, this is routine.