keep people out. sure, - believe that we have the right to keep people out. sure, they- believe that we have the right to| keep people out. sure, they may believe that we have the right to - keep people out. sure, they may come up keep people out. sure, they may come up with keep people out. sure, they may come up with a keep people out. sure, they may come up with a trit keep people out. sure, they may come up with a bit of keep people out. sure, they may come up with a bit of occasional keep people out. sure, they may come up with a bit of occasional rhetoric - up with a bit of occasional rhetoric about up with a bit of occasional rhetoric about controlling up with a bit of occasional rhetoric about controlling our up with a bit of occasional rhetoric about controlling our borders, - up with a bit of occasional rhetoric about controlling our borders, buti about controlling our borders, but that is about controlling our borders, but that is hot about controlli
Frustrated with this approach and unless it really is just a question of someone in the cabinet office is deeply committed to this interpretation of collective responsibility it s a mystery why they re doing it. they re doing it. kerstin, on the ruestion they re doing it. kerstin, on the question of they re doing it. kerstin, on the question of what they re doing it. kerstin, on the question of what baroness - they re doing it. kerstin, on the l question of what baroness hallett can do on this, can she start the inquiry as planned and let this play out or does this delay the start of the inquiry? out or does this delay the start of the inquiry? she can. it s a matter for the inquiry the inquiry? she can. it s a matter for the inquiry whether the inquiry? she can. it s a matter for the inquiry whether they - the inquiry? she can. it s a matter for the inquiry whether they thinkl for the inquiry whether they think this is for the inquiry whether they think this is material for
That michael is absolutely right. we are considering at this stage - are considering at this stage disclosure are considering at this stage disclosure to are considering at this stage disclosure to the are considering at this stage disclosure to the inquiry, . are considering at this stage l disclosure to the inquiry, and are considering at this stage - disclosure to the inquiry, and so the question disclosure to the inquiry, and so the question there disclosure to the inquiry, and so the question there is, disclosure to the inquiry, and so the question there is, is - disclosure to the inquiry, and so the question there is, is it- the question there is, is it relevant? the question there is, is it relevant? what the question there is, is it relevant? what the - the question there is, is it- relevant? what the government the question there is, is it relevant? what the government must prove relevant? what the government must prove in relevant? what the government must
Violence the former president to discourage violence and get people to stand down violence and get people to stand down. they were repeatedly rebuffed and that down. they were repeatedly rebuffed and that will bolster the prosecution s argument that donald trump prosecution s argument that donald trump wanted to see violence that day. trump wanted to see violence that dav he trump wanted to see violence that day. he wanted to see the election overturned day. he wanted to see the election overturned and an insurrection. i will note overturned and an insurrection. i will note that the committee has laid out will note that the committee has laid out that evidence for the doj for the laid out that evidence for the doj for the benefit of the special counsel for the benefit of the special counsel and will allow them to get a jump on counsel and will allow them to get a jump on these new avenues of inguirv with regard to the evidence that hope hicks gave, it was the pres