Live Breaking News & Updates on Wasn Ta Fundamental
Stay updated with breaking news from Wasn ta fundamental. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
By a mob incited by his plot to overturn this very fair election. this big lie that the election was false. take a listen to what congressman jim himes of connecticut, a democrat, said about this ongoing investigation and why it is so important for the committee to reach its results and inform voters of its results. i m hearing lots of people saying, oh, well, january 6, it was look, it wasn t a fundamental threat to our democracy. it will never happen again t. was a bunch of people surprised by what actually happened. that may or may not be true. it may be the folks i got to meet on january 6, i don t think are fundamentally the threat to our democracy today. the threat to our democracy today is things that mark meadows knows a lot about. what i see as the real ongoing threat here is the fact that we still have a former president of the united states promoting these lies to the extent that 60% 60% of republicans ....
Very significant? i m glad you ask, because i think the answer is getting lost in the january 6th argument. i m hearing lots of people say january 6th, it wasn t a fundamental threat to our democracy. it will never happen again. it was a bunch of people surprised by what actually happened. that may or may not be true. the folks i got to meet on january 6th i don t think are fundamentally the threat to our democracy today. the threat to our democracy today is things that mark meadows knows a lot about. it s the people inside the government, people like jeff clark, a senior person at the department of justice, people like john eastman, a previously respected lawyer. these are people that were inside the establishment producing arguments, producing legal rationales for what was essentially a coup d etat. there were members of congress who said we re so sorry that yesterday didn t succeed. what i see as the real on going threat here is the fact that we ....
Charged with a federal crime while he is in office. charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider. if it wasn t a fundamental part of his inaction why does he keep mentioning it? here s why. because of what came out from the white house just hours later. mueller spent two years, did an exhaustive investigation and came back to say that there was no wrongdoing by the trump campaign or any american. that s just not true. just like he said in his report, this lifelong republican, mr. mueller, says if he could clear the president he would so state. if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. instead, mr. mueller laid out five instances in his report that all met his own high bar for obstruction of justice. look, we ve been arguing for a long time that we needed to hear from mr. mueller. this is why. ....
Something was possible when it wasn t? suspicious. however, what is not suspicious is mr. mueller s mindset. he put it in writing back in march when he complained about mr. barr s four-page memo, that it did not fully capture the context, nature and substance of mr. mueller s work. he said his hands were tied as his first point in that part of the report and the man described as a sphinx for the last two years doubled down today. under longstanding department policy a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider. if it wasn t a fundamental part of his inaction why does he keep mentioning it? here s why. because of what came out from the white house just hours later. mueller spent two years, did an exhaustive investigation and came back to say that there was no wrongdoing by the trump ....
Long time brewing in states. just to sit in the court for an hour or two, as the attorneys tried to sum up everything they have been working on on this for so long, it s pretty tough. it s pretty tough to do. and it will be very interesting to sow whee what the court does it. we ll be able to listen for ourselves what took place inside the courtroom. give us a sense of what we should be listening for. any special moments or things that grabbed your attention during that about 90-minute proceeding? reporter: yeah. i do think you really want to hear, in my view, the exchanges between justice antonin scalia and ted olson as the justice tried to push him again and again it define when it was that gay marriage became a right in this country, because if ted olson were to have answered that question, then the next question obviously is, so it wasn t a fundamental right when the ....