my formal attire. i m here at my farm in kentucky. forgive me. yeah, what he should do on the build back better, he should admit defeat and get rid of it. it s done. people don t want it. the senate won t pass it. it would be the gracious them for him to do. they went through all sort of fin nagling to get there. shouldn t be on reconciliation. it shouldn t be passed 51-50. that s not the right way to do it either. he should be gracious and say that s over. let s get on to the next business. what he also should do, i think, is do payroll tax waiver, partial probably, to really make it more attractive for more low income workers to come back to the labor force. that should happen as well. and lastly, the thing i think biden should do is what i think he s trying to do is really pass the decision making on to the states rather than mandating
away. there is nothing to say if you pass the john lewis voting rights act, roberts wouldn t take it away again. i preferred hr 1 to the freedom to vote act. what did joe mansion, think about this, what did president mansion want out of the hr 1 that he wanted that he did not put into his freedom to vote act? all the ethics reforms forcing a person to release their tax returns before they run for president. prohibiting presidents from funneling money from the oval office to their family run businesses. that is what was in the freedom for the people act that mansion took out of the freedom to vote act so i think the for the people act was better but again, at this point, i will take anything from this party that actually allows people to go vote easily and frictionlessly and without the voter suppression done by the republicans and the party won t pass it. yeah. look, i don t want to lose sight
that s presidency ending in normal times. it didn t move the needle because the house democrats have been so weak in the way they have gone about this. and excessively weak. he copped to obstructive behavior. here s the question i want to ask nadler. any of the people. is the conduct that s laid out in the mueller report enough to impeach? if yes, why are we having the hearings? if no, what will it take? nancy pelosi doesn t want to move ahead with impeachment. for political reasons. she s correct. in the meantime this that happens. the party seems to be doing something. to its base. it s a stalling mechanism. i agree. but nancy pelosi is a better politician than ne. but do your job. if impeachment is warranted. and the senate won t pass it. so what, do your job.
legal position. is the president trying to push impeachment as an outcome knowing the senate won t pass it, and it becomes a victory. he may be looking for a tactical advantage, by being ability to tout the familiar that the dems are overreaching, but i tell you, it becomes a problem when we are acting based on politics, and not on principle, when we have so much evidence, first and foremost, from michael cohen s guilty plea, showing that the president committed campaign finance violation, and then in volume 2 of the mueller report, with all these felonies offenses. you know, the only way the president may be able to keep from suctionfully being prosecutored is being being reelected. after 30 years as a prosecutor, i ve seen a lot of defenses, alibi, mistaken i.d., straight-up reasonable doubt, i have never seen the defense of
underfunded, the lad respect to opportunity are usually broken. what it means for they families, there isn t community wealth or resources. so what you want through these federal policies is sort of this divergent system of wealth. so when we look at how do we solve this racial wealth gap, bring it on. whatever policies we can do to tackle each element. one of the things we need to look at also across the board is a full scale reparations program which would be looking at what was done wrong, how do we measure that and what can we do about it. a lot of people want to go straight to number three and say this is impractical. i was wondering. that s the issue. what are we solving, how are we solving it, and then implement policy. you make an interesting point in an article you wrote for new york times in which it is an op-ed where you wrote these programs fail because the benefits of capitalism always accrue to the owners of capital,