Chris Hayes discusses the days top news. Spent an entire week at one of his golf course. It should not be that hard to find out whose interest the president is serving if own the congressional leaders would say subpoena his tax returns. More likely to support a candidate who promises to be a check on the president. Fresh off another round of encouraging Election Results on tuesday, democrats have a message of their own, they are in the words of nancy pelosi clean up corruption. What does that mean . Cleaning up corruption. How do you do it . We have to make sure that we can get big money out of politics. What we have seen is dark money
risk of not getting kavanaugh confirmed. It is not a matter it is a matter of timing. That sounds like they support in impeaching Rod Rosenstein but not doing it now. The plot which is to go after Rod Rosenstein but allow the senate to jam the Supreme Court justice. Do that work and then return after the midterm elections to try to jam up Rod Rosenstein.
Chris Hayes discusses the days top news. Legislation that this congress has been pushing forward. The biggest example of it was the corrupt gop tax scam where 83 of the benefits went to the wealthiest 1 . This was not done for the people. Thats what we stand for as democrats. It was done for the lobbyist, the wealthiest, the billionaires. This is corruption happening in plain sight. I would not disagree that is corrupt. But that is every day corruption. That is a system that is shot through with corruption. I dont want to minimize that. We are talking about specific corruption in that this president has a whole host of corrupt relationships to his business and things like that. That my question would, what would they do if they got the majority they are lying, cheating, stealing and doing it with impunity. And the reason is this congress has refused to do constitutional oversight responsibilities. The House Of Representatives doesnt work for donald trump. We work for the American Peopl
government saying can we have this expert in the courtroom. the judge says yes, and puts him on the stand. the judge goes on and essentially criticizing the government in front of the judge for having welch in the courtroom during the testimony of other witnesses. the government did something interesting which they haven t done about other comments. literally filed a motion in front of him overnight showing him a transcript of what he had said and the motion he had approved. when the judge gave this curative instruction, it wasn t ambiguous, he was flat out wrong, wrong to admonish the government. never clear what impact that has on the jury. ordinarily, the judge looks to the judge as their representative in a way. he is the one who is the neutral in the case and so when the
this expert in the courtroom. the judge says yes, and puts him on the stand. the judge goes on and essentially criticizing the government in front of the judge for having welch in the courtroom during the testimony of other witnesses. the government did something interesting which they haven t done about other comments. literally filed a motion in front of him overnight showing him a transcript of what he had said and the motion he had approved. when the judge gave this curative instruction, it wasn t ambiguous, he was flat out wrong, wrong to admonish the government. never clear what impact that has on the jury. ordinarily, the judge looks to the judge as their representative in a way. he is the one who is the neutral in the case and so when the judge leans on one side in a critical way, that could wind up hurting that side.