Youre giving him the it is spelled c h s e b r o. There are not the two ease together, but Kenneth Chesebros memo that the if they did not find in the investigation. He cites Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe to support his theory about the fake electors. Lawrence tribe is going to join us tonight this is one of the lucky bookings that preexisting this story. He is going to respond to somebody who is listed now as a coconspirator in the case of the january six who was in his memo apparently trying to lean on professor tribe. We will see if that works, when he joins us. That is what they call in the business a chefs kiss, great book, and cant wait to see it. Can we. Have a good show. The Breaking News this evening is friday at ten pm. That is when the judge in the newest prosecution of donald trump will convene the first hearing in that case yesterday. Judge Tanya Chutkan asked the lawyers and the case to agree on two possible dates and times that they would all be available for hear
Investigation. He cites Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe to support his theory about the fake electors. Lawrence tribe is going to join us tonight this is one of the lucky bookings that preexisting this story. He is going to respond to somebody who is listed now as a coconspirator in the case of the january six who was in his memo apparently trying to lean on professor tribe. We will see if that works, when he joins us. That is what they call in the business a chefs kiss, great book, and cant wait to see it. Can we. Have a good show. The Breaking News this evening is friday at ten pm. That is when the judge in the newest prosecution of donald trump will convene the first hearing in that case yesterday. Judge Tanya Chutkan asked the lawyers and the case to agree on two possible dates and times that they would all be available for hearing this week. Jack smiths team of prosecutors made it very easy on the judge, saying that they would all be available at anytime. Wednesday, thursday,
grand jury here that tape and be able to decipher it or interpret what was said. they ve also heard from secretary raffensperger himself as he was subpoenaed to testify before the special grand jury. those issues of credibility are going to be very key when and if we get to the point of having a jury decide how that message should be interpreted. neil katyal, we ll have this unusual prospect eventually have to criminal trial juries evaluating that very same thing, the phone call to brad raffensperger. it is mentioned in jack smith s indictment in washington, d.c.. if there are indictment on state charges for donald trump in georgia in that trial there, it will obviously be the centerpiece of that trial in georgia. we will eventually have to different jury judgments rendered on that phone call. yes, that is right.
message should be interpreted. neil katyal, we ll have this unusual prospect eventually have to criminal trial juries evaluating that very same thing, the phone call to brad raffensperger. it is mentioned in jack smith s indictment in washington, d. c.. if there are indictment on state charges for donald trump in georgia in that trial there, it will obviously be the centerpiece of that trial in georgia. we will eventually have to different jury judgments rendered on that phone call. yes, that is right. i think that some people might be thinking, isn t that some sort of double jeopardy to have that happen? the answer did to that is no, because our constitution recognizes that where there are crimes against dual sovereigns, here the state of georgia, as well as the united states, it is absolutely appropriate that
have accused of doing you said you are have done, accused of doing you said you are have done, that s where they re questioning it in terms of the judgment. if you look at the history ofjury judgment. if you look at the history ofjuryjudgments, and jury of jury judgments, and jury verdicts. of jury judgments, and jury verdicts, often ofjuryjudgments, and jury verdicts, often you do get surprising verdicts. you do get things surprising verdicts. you do get things that people disagree with, and this things that people disagree with, and this is different to a judge verdict~ and this is different to a judge verdict~ it and this is different to a judge verdict. it doesn t set a precedent in the verdict. it doesn t set a precedent in the way verdict. it doesn t set a precedent in the way that something from a judge in the way that something from a judge would do, and therefore i do think judge would do, and therefore i do think that judge would do, and therefore i do thi