enough for trump to run out the clock? wolf, i think it probably will be enough for trump to succeed in his usual delay tactic. i largely agree with george s assessment of the arguments. i do think that there is a nonfrivolous in the raft of arguments that trump has thrown out here, the spaghetti that is dripping off the frig, there is one argument that does have more weight to it, and that is the separation of powers argument. it was just resolved by the supreme court in the mazar s case that i helped when i was impeachment co-counsel and the question is how far could congress go given constitutional separation of powers. other than that his arguments are make weights but they will be enough for the courts to delay this appearance and this document subpoena until the
sustained by big business. that populousest bit was a sham and like in 1934 we see a similar pattern of deflection when it comes to what we re up against. dozens of witnesses and participants in the january 6th insurrection have stone walled the select committee and several who have testified still refuse to answer questions. most recently the right wing fake news host alex jones revealed that he pleaded his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination nearly 100 times during an interview on monday. john eastman, the notorious trump lawyer that literally put the plan for a coup in writing also claimed his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination as a response to 150 questions and to document and to his document subpoena. according to a lawye for the house that spoke to cnn. but in contrast with the alleged fascist plot of 1934 we are seeing accountability when it comes to the maga mob who served
these impeachment developments back in washington. so fast-moving it could be hard for candidates and reporters to keep track of. but rudy giuliani has said today he is not going to comply with the congressional document subpoena. he s waiting to see what they do in terms of enforcement. i think what this will result in a harder call from the candidates on the debate stage saying they believe the president should be impeached. this led to a moment where you have a unified chorus whereas you might not have that a couple of weeks ago. how do you see it. the members of the diplomatic core and if the reports are believed and i think they are, everyone is tellingsy similar story. this is much less a factual dispute as the events unfold. there was the whistle-blower complaint and the quote/unquote transcript of the july 25 telephone call. everything tells the same story. so it is really not a factual dispute as much as it is one of interpretation and whether it rises to an impeachable
nancy pelosi as democrats are assessing support potentially for a vote to formally authorize the impeachment inquiry. let s dig deep we are our experts and analysts. maggie, what do you think? they re meeting right now. nancy pelosi is about to emerge and announced she will make a statement and we ll carry that and hear what she has to say. this is a tough decision for her. it is. i think it is hard and she may prove me wrong minutes from now so bearing that in mind, i still think it is hard for her to endorse a full impeachment vote. i think there are a lot of members of her caucus who are not in favor of it. there have been a bunch of fast-moving developments around the inquiry in the last several days in giuliani not responding to a document subpoena from house democrats in terms of what they ve heard from former trump administration officials privately about the ukraine controversy but we ll see. one of the arguments in favor of a full house vote to give them greater legal auth
only going to come from donald trump. roger stone s lawyer actually said the reason he took the fifth amendment with the senate judiciary committee is that the committee leaks. you don t have a legal right to take the fifth amendment because you re worried somebody might leak. the fifth amendment says you re taking it because you fear you might incriminate yourself in a crime by speaking. there is no other legitimate reason to take the fifth amendment. that s right, lawrence, there is no leaking provision in the fifth amendment in the constitution. and specifically here, remember, he has taken the fifth with regard to a request for documents, a document subpoena. that right is sort of even more narrow, if you will, because turning over documents doesn t always incriminate someone. it s only if the actual act of turning over the documents would incriminate someone. so in other words, if i steal some documents and i have them and someone asks me for them, by turning them over, i m sh