understand why chuck schumer is against free speech or free americans in a free country. how do you think this will allow you to sort of expand your freedom of expression, your freedom of spending your money around you know, how will you do things differently now under this law? because you can t as we put it up before, you can t give a lot of money to one candidate. you max out at the 2,300 level and then, you know, you can spread the money around to a lot more candidates. right? that s correct. you can support more candidates. you can support more parties. and more committees or pacs, which are essentially state parties. so it allows you to support more numbers. it involves the number of candidates and committees that you can support. it s not the base limit. shaun, thank you very much. shaun mccutcheon, at the center of this very controversial decision that some believe will lead to the ruination of the campaign finance system. you are on the other side of that, sir, obvio
understand why chuck schumer is against free speech or free americans in a free country. how do you think this will allow you to sort of expand your freedom of expression, your freedom of spending your money around you know, how will you do things differently now under this law? because you can t as we put it up before, you can t give a lot of money to one candidate. you max out at the 2,300 level and then, you know, you can spread the money around to a lot more candidates. right? that s correct. you can support more candidates. you can support more parties. and more committees or pacs, which are essentially state parties. so it allows you to support more numbers. it involves the number of candidates and committees that you can support. it s not the base limit. shaun, thank you very much. shaun mccutcheon, at the center of this very controversial decision that some believe will lead to the ruination of the campaign finance system. you are on the other side of that, sir, obvio
chairman and former chief counsel to the republican national economy, and pete williams. i have my own theory on this but there are specific questions. interestingly mccutcheon s lawyer is the same one that brought the citizens united case to the supreme court. basic question is is it constitutional to have this limit on what you can give every two years. they say, yeah, we understand the anti-corruption reason to have the individual limits but they say there s no such thing at play if you re giving to several if you max out on what you can individually give to a whole bunch of candidates. now the government s argument is that s just an end run around the individual contribution limits. then you can give to all sorts of people and have that money funnel back and it is a thing we don t want to have happen. but here s the thing. what mccutcheon says is, i think you should find these limits unconstitutional. i think you should at the very least, if you have a problem, you should go ba
someone s life and now if you re saying overcharge, if you max that with the other things he s saying in terms of attacking the prosecution and why is it me who has to bring out the evidence and the scientists and not them. what are they hiding from you? now they do a compromise verdict, and that compromise verdict is a win for the defense, because it s gets you off of the top count and lesser included like man 2 and who knows, she sees the light of y. many years go by, but do they come after charge? i think that s george was a major red herring, i don t see them going after george. the defense has rested, the prosecution tomorrow has rebuttal, the last word in this case and then the jury will be charged and the fate of casey anthony in their hands. for more coverage we ll have our coverage throughout the night and justice jeanine