To have said all i need you to do is to find me 11,000 votes unchanged. I think if you look at that context it is pretty clear that petitioner is acting in the capacity of office seeker, not as president i am focus on the legal test. I am not hearing any objections to it. Other than i think the d. C. Circuit place more Content Consideration off limit then i went. I want to understand on the court immunity, or whatever word we use, it seems to me that we are narrowing the ground of dispute here considerably. Do we look at motives . The president s motives for his actions . For example, he has lots of power as weve discussed, but he might use them to enhance his election in his personal interest. It is not a relevant consideration when we look at core powers . I think of this more as looking at the objectives of the activity as opposed to the subjective motives in the sense that you are i think there is concern about seeing a electoral motive to be reelected as such. Every firstterm pres
Content, its clear that petitioner is acting in the capacity as office seeker, not as president. We would look at that content. Okay. The test im focused on the legal test. Im not hearing any objections to it. Other than, i think that the d. C. Circuit placed more Content Consideration off limits than i would. All right. I wanted to understand, on the Core Immunity or whatever word we use, that it seems to me we are narrowing the ground of dispute here considerably, do we look at motives, the president s motives for his actions . For example, he has more power as we discussed, but he might use them to enhance his election, his personal interests. Is that a relevant consideration when were looking at core powers . I am thinking of this more as looking at the objective of the activity as opposed to the subjective motive in the sense that your honor is talking about. I think theres a lot of concern about saying an electoral motive to be reelected. Right. Every firstterm president everythi
A former american president and his fixer and a big time ally of his in the tabloid media. It was a plan crafted to cast then candidate donald trump in a positive light in the allimportant tabloids. Using stories that were favorable to him and silencing ones that werent and smearing everybody that got in the way. The witness on the stand today on the Hush Money Trial, details exactly how this scheme worked on a daytoday basis. David pecker, the former publisher of the National Enquirer described a relationship with donald trump that dated back to the late 1980s and noted that trump was one the first people to call him and congratulate him when he bought the National Enquirer back in 1999. So tlir friendship was already long standing by the time donald trump decided so to run for president. The questioning today was the details an the operational aspects of that explicit agreement between trump, his lawyer Michael Cohen, and david pecker. And what they did to boost trumps campaign. And
More now on developments in the middle east. Uk Prime Minister rishi sunak will make a statement to the House Of Commons shortly. The statement will be about the iranian attack on israel and how rafjets helped to shoot down some of the drones that were launched against israel. Earlier, the foreign secretary lord David Cameron confirmed that the uk would absolutely consider further sanctions on iran in response to its attack on israel. We will return to the House Of Commons when rishi sunak begins his statement. We can cross live to westminster to speak to our Political Correspondent harry farley. I suppose we will get the details of the british involvement but i suppose the basic message to israel of restraint will be underlined in the next few minutes. I of restraint will be underlined in the next few minutes. Of restraint will be underlined in the next few minutes. I think thats exactly right. The next few minutes. I think thats exactly right. I the next few minutes. I think thats ex
A couple of hours ago. Hes charged with 3a counts of fraud, relating to hush money allegedly paid to the former adult film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 president ial election. Hes now in the courthouse itself for the start ofJury Selection. Prosecutors accuse him, of arranging payments to Stormy Daniels in an effort to buy her silence. Donald trump has pleaded not guiltydescribing the case as a witchhunt. He spoke to the media just before heading into the courtroom. Hes been in the courts for around an hour and a half. Lets hear what he had to say. Something like this has never happened before. Theres never been anything like it. Every legal scholar said this case is nonsense, it should never have been brought. It doesnt deserve anything like this. There is no case, and theyve said it. People that dont necessarily follow or like donald trump said this is an outrage that this case was brought. This is political persecution. This is a persecution like never before. Nobodys ever se