we won t let beijing temper tantrum dictate. kevin court has the latest. good to be with you, america s solidarity with taiwan is more important today as the world faces choice says between democracy. nancy pelosi is just about to depart after a brief stop in tapei taiwan. she said this trip is about america s unwaivering commitment to the country. in terms of governance we commend taiwan for being one of the freest societies in the world. we come in friendship and leadership and want the world to recognize that. china condemning this highest level u.s. visit in 25 years as threat to peace and stability in the taiwan strait with the ambassador issues threat, the u.s. must pay the price for its own mistake and we mean what we say. despite its position it doesn t support taiwan independence, the white house says the speaker is entitled to travel as she sees fit and threats from beijing would be met measure for measure. there is nothing like the american military and spi
china hated every second of it and pelosi is calling her trip a defense of democracy. beijing is calling it a provocation. china s military is poised for live fire drills in taiwan s water and airspace in the coming days. here is national security council spokesman john kirby. this is exactly what we would expect the chinese to do in the wake of or even during speaker pelosi s trip. this is pretty much the playbook we expected and we ll be watching to see how they develop. again, we urge beijing not to escalate the tensions. there is no reason to. nothing about speaker pelosi s trip was inconsistent with our longstanding approach to china and supporting taiwan s self-defense. harris: we can hear from admiral kirby but apparently not from president biden who initially pushed back on pelosi going there in the first place. he didn t want her to go. both republicans and democrats have agreed supporting taiwan with china always lurking is absolutely the right thing to do. form
committee? you know in the next few weeks you ll hear the public hearings of the committee. i m surprised that he s not a part of that, but that tells me they actually wanted to get answers and not have the greatest show on earth that would happen in front fortof th cameras. the fact that he entered into a subpoena, answered it and answered questions. he is a person that was actively trying to ask legislators to overturn an election, to overturn the will of the people. so they have rudy giuliani testify for a nine-hour period? i bet they have a lot of information from him. i m sure there s more to come from that. laura, you have yourself a fantastic weekend. thank you, you, too. thank you. i ll see you later. this is don lemon tonight. here s the breaking news tonight. first, in person rudy giuliani meeting with the january 6 committee for nine hours. rudy giuliani, personal attorney to then-president and the number one promoter of the big lie of election fraud was
lawsuits. that is going to do it for me. deadline: white house starts right now. hi there, everyone. happy wednesday and happy juneteenth, it is 4:00 in the heeft. there might be only one thing more alarming than what has become near medieval siege on ow country s tradition of respect for the rule of law. and it is the fact that many americans regrettably but understandably have after all of these years of trump and his allies attacking it, grown numb to it or view it as a new norm. maybe it is an act of self-preservation or tune it out when trump or a voice on conservative media spits out such venom toward the men and women of doj or the fbi. but the temptation to register the lies being told about the justice system, about the fbi, simply is white noise or politics as usual. in our view it represents as grave of a threat to democracy as the lies being told themselves. as an example, considered what the disgrayed ex-president told the crowd in wisconsin on tuesday. the
look at them, scrutinize them because oh, it s unconstitutional if you do that. what does that look like, either congressional or executive action. congress could have some hearings, and they could also consider having better forcing rules in terms of the disclosures, in terms of putting a code of judicial ethics upon them. certainly could get push back from the court itself, but that kind of push back will exert pressure too. from the executive branch, the justice department could open up an investigation, doesn t have to be a criminal investigation. it could be looking at these issues about disclosure, thomas in particular looks like he has done a lot of amending, and they could take a look at that to see, you know, is there any sort of falsehood there. likelihood of doj, particularly under merrick garland wanting to open a criminal investigation or charge a sitting justice, very very low. but that kind of pressure could ultimately, i think, cause the court itself to feel like we