0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FBC
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
we saw one of the supreme court this week where the court was skeptical about the ability of jack smith to bring some of these charges, they been stretched to such a limit the question is law. whether or not the people who really are interfering in the election are those bringing suit for the sole purpose of tearing down the private opponent in a campaign potentially even jailing him prior to the election so they can keep our. >> these court cases against trump are all out will assault connected to the biden white house to stop the political rival trump. the courts to knock out and gager opponent. let's not america. >> it's just a real problem. we are used to hearing other countries do things like this. the fact that we have so many in the press corps right now on this situation because there's a short term thinking going on in my was one of the things that was so important the supreme court talked about this week, the person arguing on behalf of jack smith wanted to talk about the specifics of this case and suggested is one time figure will never deal with this again and the court want
we saw one of the supreme court this week where the court was skeptical about the ability of jack smith to bring some of these charges, they been stretched to such a limit the question is law. whether or not the people who really are interfering in the election are those bringing suit for the sole purpose of tearing down the private opponent in a campaign potentially even jailing him prior to the election so they can keep our. >> these court cases against trump are all out will assault...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
so at best, jack smith is left with come if the ruling goes as expected, the difficult task of delineating and pretending that while this step he took as president was political and personal but it wasn't official. i don't see how you take the 208 and a separate the two issues as personal and presidential -- how you take and a separate the two issues as presidential and personal. host: do you think you should get immunity? guest: the constitution is set up where the president has prerogatives as chief executive and that means he is not subjected to scrutiny by the courts for those in office. host: justice kagan said that the founders did but the immunity clause in the constitution and they meant not to because we would've gotten rid of the king. guest: i guess the response to that would be immunity flows from the constitution that he has prerogatives as president of the united states, the executive power resides in him. who can check him beyond the processes envisioned in the constitution, which specifically is impeachment. host: we are taking calls for tom fitton, president of judicial wa
so at best, jack smith is left with come if the ruling goes as expected, the difficult task of delineating and pretending that while this step he took as president was political and personal but it wasn't official. i don't see how you take the 208 and a separate the two issues as personal and presidential -- how you take and a separate the two issues as presidential and personal. host: do you think you should get immunity? guest: the constitution is set up where the president has prerogatives...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
in fact, that's one of the reasons that jack smith's team recorded the all of their interviews of witnesses and provided actual transcripts in the mar-a-lago documents investigation because they didn't want to be confused of having incomplete fbi 302s, so bove should have known going in there that that is a criticism that can be lobbed at any fbi 302. the other thing i wanted to say about sue's observation that trump is tired. there have been days trump has been alone. they have seen the criticism in the press about him falling asleep and/or how small he seems when he's solitary, so he is always accompanied by one of his lawyers directly adjacent to him now when they go to these long side bars. >> they actually shuffled over to make sure there's someone sitting next to him. >> so they actually change seats? i just want to -- i just want to clarify that point, a lawyer will actually change seats to be sitting next to donald trump when the others may have gone up to the bench? >> that's absolutely true, and it seems like the strategy is twofold. one, to make sure he always has company and doe
in fact, that's one of the reasons that jack smith's team recorded the all of their interviews of witnesses and provided actual transcripts in the mar-a-lago documents investigation because they didn't want to be confused of having incomplete fbi 302s, so bove should have known going in there that that is a criticism that can be lobbed at any fbi 302. the other thing i wanted to say about sue's observation that trump is tired. there have been days trump has been alone. they have seen the...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
whatever they decide, if there is an actual trial, let's say they do side with jack smith as a special counsel, trial would start about three months after that, and it is estimated that a trial could take up to 12 weeks. all this timing is critical, of course, because we're now 192 days away from november 5th, election day. it is not a lot of time here and the justices in some ways really understand that. as you said, you played that clip of neil gorsuch saying whatever they write, they're writing a rule for the ages. over and over again we heard the justices and lawyers talk about the stakes of this case. so it will be really interesting to see what happens as election day comes upon us. >> yamiche alcindor, thank you very much. glen, trump's lawyer conceded during the arguments that some of the acts that trump is accused of were not official acts. here is an exchange. >> the petitioner turned to a private attorney, was willing to spread false claims of election fraud to spearhead his challenges to the election results. private? petitioner conspired with another private attorney who c
whatever they decide, if there is an actual trial, let's say they do side with jack smith as a special counsel, trial would start about three months after that, and it is estimated that a trial could take up to 12 weeks. all this timing is critical, of course, because we're now 192 days away from november 5th, election day. it is not a lot of time here and the justices in some ways really understand that. as you said, you played that clip of neil gorsuch saying whatever they write, they're...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
>> well, i think, julie, they pinned down dreeben, making the argument for jack smith team. they pinned him down to a concession there is a bit of presidential immunity that goes around the core of the president's duties. justice kagan is correct they didn't use the word immunity. trump's team pushes back the vesting of executive power in the president itself imply indicates immunity because congress cannot enact a law that criminalizes the president's performance with his core responsibilities. so i think what will happen here is two-fold. one is you have to decide how far outside the core of the president's duties the immunity extends. and the second thing is because the d.c. circuit did not go through the mental acrobatics of trying to figure out which acts in the indictment are private and don't have immunity and which are official and do, that has to be done. so i would anticipate that they may send the case back to the judge with instructions to sort out what's official and what is not? >> julie: i get word they have resumed the trial. david pecker on the stand, the fo
>> well, i think, julie, they pinned down dreeben, making the argument for jack smith team. they pinned him down to a concession there is a bit of presidential immunity that goes around the core of the president's duties. justice kagan is correct they didn't use the word immunity. trump's team pushes back the vesting of executive power in the president itself imply indicates immunity because congress cannot enact a law that criminalizes the president's performance with his core...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
jack smith wants one before the election. >> dana: david spunt in washington, d.c. for us. thank you so much. joining us for more on all this is attorney will sharp. he is on the legal team representing former president trump before the u.s. supreme court and a candidate for missouri attorney general. thank you for making time for us today. david axelrod was a campaign consultant and worked in the white house for obama. he now has a big podcast and tweeted this yesterday. based oh than what we heard today from scotus it may seem trump may skate past the election without standing trial on the january 6th charges. if so the new york city trial is likely the only he will face pre-november. under the circumstances the best scenario he could have hoped for. how do you see it? >> we were certainly optimistic coming out of the supreme court yesterday. they seem to be taking this issue of presidential immunity, the scope of presidential immunity, very seriously and they seemed very receptive to our arguments without a robust presidential immunity for a president's official acts in
jack smith wants one before the election. >> dana: david spunt in washington, d.c. for us. thank you so much. joining us for more on all this is attorney will sharp. he is on the legal team representing former president trump before the u.s. supreme court and a candidate for missouri attorney general. thank you for making time for us today. david axelrod was a campaign consultant and worked in the white house for obama. he now has a big podcast and tweeted this yesterday. based oh than...
58
58
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 58
favorite 0
quote 1
smith. the supreme court focused on the presidency and not trump. that gets to something that president trump said moments ago. here is what he said just walking into court. >> yesterday i the supreme court having to do with immunity. i heard the argument was brilliant. i listened to it last night and thought it was great. the judges' questions were great and all presidents have to have immunity. this has nothing to do with me. absolutely nothing. all presidents have to have immunity. or you don't have a president. certainly not a president the founders wanted. >> shannon: that seemed to be a lot of what the justices were reading through yesterday. what's the future implication not just for this case but for presidents to come? i think it was justice gorsuch said we're writing a rule for the ages. >> exactly. that is the question here. not just about what you think of donald trump. but about whether or not the presidency, the institution of the presidency is protected from lawsuits that coul
smith. the supreme court focused on the presidency and not trump. that gets to something that president trump said moments ago. here is what he said just walking into court. >> yesterday i the supreme court having to do with immunity. i heard the argument was brilliant. i listened to it last night and thought it was great. the judges' questions were great and all presidents have to have immunity. this has nothing to do with me. absolutely nothing. all presidents have to have immunity. or...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
KGO
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the claim is central to trump's defense in the january 6th case that special counsel jack smith brought on trump says many of the election interference efforts smith alleges were official acts. liberal justices are not buying the argument. >> the framers did not put an immunity clause into the constitution. wasn't the whole point that the president was not a monarch and the president was not supposed to be above the law. >> conservatives on the high court are not fully embracing trump's defense, but they maintain the president needs some protections from prosecution. >> he makes a mistake. he's subject to the criminal laws just like anybody else. you don't think he's in a special a peculiarly precarious position >> to send this case back down to the trial court, if that happens, it would mean significant delays for trump's election interference case. back to you at the desk. reggie and julian. >> thanks, amanda. coming up on abc seven mornings, tech investors are getting some encouraging news. what's driving revenue for google and microsoft . >> and we want to give you a live look at th
the claim is central to trump's defense in the january 6th case that special counsel jack smith brought on trump says many of the election interference efforts smith alleges were official acts. liberal justices are not buying the argument. >> the framers did not put an immunity clause into the constitution. wasn't the whole point that the president was not a monarch and the president was not supposed to be above the law. >> conservatives on the high court are not fully embracing...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
jack smith in the courtroom and all justices went back and forth with two extreme positions. former president's legal team says he has immunity and special counsel says he has none. what it seemed like justices are trying to get to is middle ground, presidents need some level of immunity so they can make difficult decisions, but not efverything he ever did woud be covered. they are trying to find middle ground. as jonathan turley and colleagues have said, i get the sense they send it to a lower court to deal with again, that turns into a net win for trump legal team. they'll have that private vote today. we won't know for a while. >> guy: we were talking on the guy benson show. plug there. what does that mean for the timeline? that is crucial here. >> shannon: yeah, if that would happen, they would have to pick and choose through what are private acts, what were official acts he did as president, not as a candidate or person. as the president. that is going to take some time before you get back to the trial on the merits. one question yesterday, i think from justice barrett,
jack smith in the courtroom and all justices went back and forth with two extreme positions. former president's legal team says he has immunity and special counsel says he has none. what it seemed like justices are trying to get to is middle ground, presidents need some level of immunity so they can make difficult decisions, but not efverything he ever did woud be covered. they are trying to find middle ground. as jonathan turley and colleagues have said, i get the sense they send it to a lower...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
KGO
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
lawyers for special counsel jack smith argue no president is above the law. here's abc news reporter jay o'brien. >> this morning, the supreme court weighing former president trump's unprecedented claim. absolute presidential immunity. the argument the president can never face criminal prosecution for anything they do in office linked to their official duties without presidential immunity from criminal prosecution, there can be no presidency as we know it. the claim central to trump's defense in the january 6th case, brought by special counsel jack smith. trump asserting many of the election interference efforts smith alleges were official acts. liberal justices not buying the argument. >> the framers did not put an immunity clause into the constitution. wasn't the whole point that the president was not a monarch and the president was not supposed to be above the law. >> responding to justice sotomayor, trump's attorney, arguing a president assassinating a political rival they view as corrupt could even qualify as an official act and not be subject to crimina
lawyers for special counsel jack smith argue no president is above the law. here's abc news reporter jay o'brien. >> this morning, the supreme court weighing former president trump's unprecedented claim. absolute presidential immunity. the argument the president can never face criminal prosecution for anything they do in office linked to their official duties without presidential immunity from criminal prosecution, there can be no presidency as we know it. the claim central to trump's...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
KGO
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
smith for his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. the liberal justices pressed trump's lawyers on where that argument could lead if the president decides that his rival is a corrupt person in and he orders the military or orders someone to assassinate him, is that within his official acts that for which he can get immunity? but the conservative justices made the case that presidents need some protection. >> presidents have to make a lot of tough decisions about enforcing the law, and they have to make decisions about questions that are unsettled. did i understand you to say, well, you know, if he makes a mistake, he makes a mistake. he's subject to the criminal laws just like anybody else. you don't think he's in a special a peculiarly precarious position. >> the takeaway from yesterday's arguments expect a delay in thel laws just like anybody else. you don't think he's in a special a peculiarly precarious position. >> the takeaway from yesterday's arguments expect a delay in the former national enquirer publisher david pecker was ba
smith for his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. the liberal justices pressed trump's lawyers on where that argument could lead if the president decides that his rival is a corrupt person in and he orders the military or orders someone to assassinate him, is that within his official acts that for which he can get immunity? but the conservative justices made the case that presidents need some protection. >> presidents have to make a lot of tough decisions about enforcing the...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 4
so at best, jack smith is left with come if the ruling goes as expected, the difficult task of delineating and pretending that while this step he took as president was political and personal but it wasn't official. i don't see how you take the 208 and a separate the two issues as personal and presidential -- how you take and a separate the two issues as presidential and personal. host: do you think you should get immunity? guest: the constitution is set up where the president has prerogatives as chief executive and that means he is not subjected to scrutiny by the courts for those in office. host: justice kagan said that the founders did but the immunity clause in the constitution and they meant not to because we would've gotten rid of the king. guest: i guess the response to that would be immunity flows from the constitution that he has prerogatives as president of the united states, the executive power resides in him. who can check him beyond the processes envisioned in the constitution, which specifically is impeachment. host: we are taking calls for tom fitton, president of judicial wa
so at best, jack smith is left with come if the ruling goes as expected, the difficult task of delineating and pretending that while this step he took as president was political and personal but it wasn't official. i don't see how you take the 208 and a separate the two issues as personal and presidential -- how you take and a separate the two issues as presidential and personal. host: do you think you should get immunity? guest: the constitution is set up where the president has prerogatives...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
jack smith can say, i'll pare this down and include only the crimes that are private acts. or as the lawyer for the solicitor general -- or for the special counsel said yesterday, thinking of donald trump in his role as office holder versus office seeker. there are a lot of acts here as office seeker where i think he could say, fine, even if -- you know, we'll litigate these issues another day, but i'm ready to go to trial on just these issues relating to his private acts. if that's the case, i think that this case could go to trial before the election. >> that's interesting. we'll keep an eye on that. jen, as you know, the trump team has always felt a delay is a win for them with the theory of the case being, if they can push all of this stuff back with delay, delay, delay, past election day, he gets himself re-elected, makes it all go away. on the other side of that, though, as you also know very well, talking to people around the biden campaign, they are not counting on these cases to save them. they are running a campaign to win. they do believe that his sitting in cour
jack smith can say, i'll pare this down and include only the crimes that are private acts. or as the lawyer for the solicitor general -- or for the special counsel said yesterday, thinking of donald trump in his role as office holder versus office seeker. there are a lot of acts here as office seeker where i think he could say, fine, even if -- you know, we'll litigate these issues another day, but i'm ready to go to trial on just these issues relating to his private acts. if that's the case, i...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
>> brian, i think the most important concession was by michael dreeben who was the lawyer for jack smith and for the biden justice department who basically conceded that there is presidential immunity from prosecution. now, he doesn't allow that it's as robust as president trump argues. but he certainly made a concession to the court that there is an am bit of executive authority that congress can't criminalize once you make a decision that there is presidential immunity, then the question becomes what acts does it cover? so i think by the end of the argument, it became at least to my mind much more likely that the court may resolve this by sending the case back to trial judge in washington with instructions to go through the indictment and sort out what is an official act of the presidency what is a private act that isn't covered by immunity. if that's what the court does, i don't see how this case gets to trial prior to election day. >> ainsley: what happens if this does. smith's way on almost everything. you know, ainsley, judges behave better when they know someone is checking their
>> brian, i think the most important concession was by michael dreeben who was the lawyer for jack smith and for the biden justice department who basically conceded that there is presidential immunity from prosecution. now, he doesn't allow that it's as robust as president trump argues. but he certainly made a concession to the court that there is an am bit of executive authority that congress can't criminalize once you make a decision that there is presidential immunity, then the...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
but that said they couldn't have done this in december when jack smith asked them to and they didn't. >> well, what would it off? what i think they should do here? something that is, they won't do this. i'm afraid, but they could say, look we're not going to decide whether the official acts of the president are subject to criminal prosecution. but we'll leave that for another time. what we're going to tell you is overthrowing the overthrowing election. it's not an official act and make a factual finding and it says, as they did in bush versus gore, which embarrassing versus them, but where they, they said look, someone has to do this. we'll do it, we'll say what the president did here are the former president. these are, these are crimes, these are clearly crimes. these, this is a coup. and now he can be prosecuted for those things when we are saying that legal question, we postpone the factual question, we decide here and now it doesn't seem like it, sir, what did you see yesterday? >> every time we find ourselves at a new junction on this particular issue, i become deeply enraged be
but that said they couldn't have done this in december when jack smith asked them to and they didn't. >> well, what would it off? what i think they should do here? something that is, they won't do this. i'm afraid, but they could say, look we're not going to decide whether the official acts of the president are subject to criminal prosecution. but we'll leave that for another time. what we're going to tell you is overthrowing the overthrowing election. it's not an official act and make a...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the take was oral argument was disaster for special counsel jack smith. at least 5-quart republican seemed eager to o the very leasg to permit trump to delay, criminal trial adding the trust does seem to hedged the mostme john roberts also seem toec think that trump enjoys some immunity from federal prosecution. a little bit about the argued cases and clerk for is justice scalia and thomas. chris, is the real reason for the left to be in despair tonight customer >> i think it was a good day for former president trump info t i supreme court court, laura. but i think that is because he's got the law and common sense on his side. i i mean, this is -- the questiont edas you just read is whether aa president can bevi subjected toh criminal liability after leavine office for official acts, right? nobody is arguing here about the president's being immune for private acts.th so, murder, speeding, whatever. but the thing is, if we crossedn the rubicon of saying that our presidents can bche criminallyon charged with for their official acts, we don't h have a countr
the take was oral argument was disaster for special counsel jack smith. at least 5-quart republican seemed eager to o the very leasg to permit trump to delay, criminal trial adding the trust does seem to hedged the mostme john roberts also seem toec think that trump enjoys some immunity from federal prosecution. a little bit about the argued cases and clerk for is justice scalia and thomas. chris, is the real reason for the left to be in despair tonight customer >> i think it was a good...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
this was jack smith with a very receptive court trying to push for something that makes no sense. speedy trial, right. is entirely are 99% designed to protect a defendant, particularly incarcerated defendant, from sitting and rotting in prison. and then eventually being acquitted. so this idea that they had to have done was pretty shamelessly political. and i think that's why the supreme court bristled when jack smith said less expedited, i don't think they care about i have this whole conversation months ago. well, they don't care about the political timeline that jack created. and so what i'm saying is the realistic ending of this case, if the majority holds with how oral argument went, is that they're going to be returning all of these cases were immunity is in play to fact-finding lower courts, which will then have and you're like you have with police shootings about whether it's in the course of employment, then they're probably going to march right back up to the supreme part and say, how about this is not the last appeal to go all the way up without question. >> well, if it
this was jack smith with a very receptive court trying to push for something that makes no sense. speedy trial, right. is entirely are 99% designed to protect a defendant, particularly incarcerated defendant, from sitting and rotting in prison. and then eventually being acquitted. so this idea that they had to have done was pretty shamelessly political. and i think that's why the supreme court bristled when jack smith said less expedited, i don't think they care about i have this whole...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
he represents special counsel jack smith. putting that out there bribery, treason, sedition, murder, and here conspiring to use fraud to overturn the results of an election and perpetuate himself in power. this is the entire ball game. it's not something you can slice in half and come up with a tidier way that keeps you out of the politics -- >> if you're someone who studied the 2025 project, the platform for a second term term, there is no separation at the policy level between trump, the private person who would act, and trump the wannabe resident again in his official acts. they are together officially and publicly. when he ran the first time, to unearth what he really wanted to do with the border. it was a scoop and leak that led to the store we know about and covered the part to do illegal things at the border. it's in a document and you can keyword search it and the official and private acts of the second term agenda. what they do doesn't just matter in terms of the first-ever file and transfer of power in america havin
he represents special counsel jack smith. putting that out there bribery, treason, sedition, murder, and here conspiring to use fraud to overturn the results of an election and perpetuate himself in power. this is the entire ball game. it's not something you can slice in half and come up with a tidier way that keeps you out of the politics -- >> if you're someone who studied the 2025 project, the platform for a second term term, there is no separation at the policy level between trump,...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i don't think anybody has thought of so far that jack smith could do. i don't want to put any idea i sat in his head because i hate this prosecution. prosecution r. fai i think it's unconstitutional and i think it's wrong. bu would be interestingsee to see if jack smith triedifsm to take that concessioitn and rn with it. i don't know what the courts would do. macoi'm sure, if i would have me that concession. but with all thade that said, m, either you agree that this case now no chance of being triede of wefore november, or at least is that your take? we only have about 10 seconds each. grean secot yeah, i just think to's impossible to get this done. it's inevitable that the supreme court, regardles gets of their precise decision, they got to send it back to thee lower court for findings of fact. at the very leas t by the trial court judge and professor. there's a current indictment. it can't put under the current indictment the cur, can't be trd before the election. but if they amended the indictment to include only the conceded thd publiceitu private
i don't think anybody has thought of so far that jack smith could do. i don't want to put any idea i sat in his head because i hate this prosecution. prosecution r. fai i think it's unconstitutional and i think it's wrong. bu would be interestingsee to see if jack smith triedifsm to take that concessioitn and rn with it. i don't know what the courts would do. macoi'm sure, if i would have me that concession. but with all thade that said, m, either you agree that this case now no chance of being...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> i thought it had to be a dispiriting day for special counsel, jack smith. you saw, one after another, the members of the conservative majority on the court basically signal discomfort with his position and some degree of alignment with trump's claim that there should be at least some type of immunity or protection for a former president from criminal charges. i have a vivid memory of sitting there, and having each of those justices, justice kavanaugh, chief justice john roberts, and judge gorsuch, going one by one and making clear that they were not going to come out in this case the way that jack smith wants them to come out. at that point, it's a numbers game that i do not think looks good. >> mark, were you as surprised as i was to hear the line of questioning that came out of some of the more conservative justices, like brett kavanaugh and judge gorsuch and samuel alito? >> i was. the sense that i got from those justices was that to them, to their minds, the real threat to democracy was not trump's effort on january 6th, to overturn a free and fair pres
. >> i thought it had to be a dispiriting day for special counsel, jack smith. you saw, one after another, the members of the conservative majority on the court basically signal discomfort with his position and some degree of alignment with trump's claim that there should be at least some type of immunity or protection for a former president from criminal charges. i have a vivid memory of sitting there, and having each of those justices, justice kavanaugh, chief justice john roberts, and...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
jack smith's team was trying to undo 234 years of presidential precedent in the supreme cour t, arguing that presidents should be held criminally liable for actions they've taken office. >> the judges, though, not convinced. >> there's the old song aboutabu indicting a ham sandwich. yes, but i think just a few weeks you had a lot of experience in the justice department. you comeyoiv across a lot of cas where the the u.s. attorney or another federal prosecutor really wanted to indict a casenf in the grand jury, refused to do so. >> t are suc that,es you know. yes. but i think that the other oncea in a while there's an eclipse to justice kavanaugh a asked like, why wouldn't this create a vicious cycle of partisas cre presidential prosecutions and pardons and certain going forward is that the system when former forme presidents are subt to prosecution in the historyg of morrison versus olson, tells us it's not going to stop. us's going to it's's goingo cyca cycle back and be used against the current president or pr president or and the next president and the next president after that presi
jack smith's team was trying to undo 234 years of presidential precedent in the supreme cour t, arguing that presidents should be held criminally liable for actions they've taken office. >> the judges, though, not convinced. >> there's the old song aboutabu indicting a ham sandwich. yes, but i think just a few weeks you had a lot of experience in the justice department. you comeyoiv across a lot of cas where the the u.s. attorney or another federal prosecutor really wanted to indict...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the legitimacy of the appointment of jack smith. that is not even before the court. and thomas asked about that. he remain it is most mysterious on the court today. we don't know what he thought. >> i think his jenny was showing. when you work for a president, you know these are just guys and girls and these particular guys consume all of this. and what was clear today, they will direct quote segments from all of these programs. alito gives speeches in front of conservatives and i'm sure conservatives in the audience who don't watch our programs are like what is he talking about. they are bound to trump in their feelings of being persecuted. they found common cause with the feeling of persecution. what is amazing to me as a nonlawyer is a federal judge carter out in california was like the further we get, the murmur key it gets but in the immediate aftermath, trump clearly committed the crimes and federal judges said more likely than not he committed felonies. him and that eastman guy. the further we get, the the more the people of the highest levels, the court held.
the legitimacy of the appointment of jack smith. that is not even before the court. and thomas asked about that. he remain it is most mysterious on the court today. we don't know what he thought. >> i think his jenny was showing. when you work for a president, you know these are just guys and girls and these particular guys consume all of this. and what was clear today, they will direct quote segments from all of these programs. alito gives speeches in front of conservatives and i'm sure...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
BBCNEWS
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
but jack smith, the special counsel who is, of course, prosecuting donald trump for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election and the events around january 6 and the attack on the capitol. he says no—one is above the law, and that's what the justices have been wrestling with. they, i think, were pretty sceptical of the idea of total immunity from prosecution. now, that may be bad news for donald trump, but they also may want to make a kind of distinction between acts done as a private citizen or for private reasons, and acts done as official as part of the officialjob. and that may mean they push this back down to the lower courts, which could delay the case even further. and we're already looking at a very tight timetable forjack smith, the special counsel, to bring this case before the election. pro—palestinian protests on american university and college campuses are spreading, with hundreds of arrests, as police confront the demonstrators. some are likening the student activism to the wave of protests during the vietnam war in the late 1960s. unrest intensified last week after studen
but jack smith, the special counsel who is, of course, prosecuting donald trump for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election and the events around january 6 and the attack on the capitol. he says no—one is above the law, and that's what the justices have been wrestling with. they, i think, were pretty sceptical of the idea of total immunity from prosecution. now, that may be bad news for donald trump, but they also may want to make a kind of distinction between acts done as a private...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
smith has an option and i wonder if yes thought about it he could actually achieve what he wants to achieve , as sleazy as i think it is trying to mainly get a down and dirty conviction before the election if he did the following, a fee tomorrow had the grand jury reindict donald trump only charging private acts not acts that are immunized trump's own lawyer acknowledged publicly on the record that it would be constitutional permissible to indict and try a president for private acts and of the indictment as it exists today is a combination of jumble really of private acts and public acts so jack smith would probably have the option of going back and getting a new indictment and thereby moving the supreme court decision by simply taking the position that trump's lawyer made and using it as the basis for prosecuting he may lose that case obviously because i don't know whether there is enough in the private act to warrant a criminal prosecution but that is an option that i know i don't think he knew else has thought of so far that jack smith could do i don't want to put any ideas in hi
smith has an option and i wonder if yes thought about it he could actually achieve what he wants to achieve , as sleazy as i think it is trying to mainly get a down and dirty conviction before the election if he did the following, a fee tomorrow had the grand jury reindict donald trump only charging private acts not acts that are immunized trump's own lawyer acknowledged publicly on the record that it would be constitutional permissible to indict and try a president for private acts and of the...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
KQED
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
jack smith, the special counsel prosecuting donald trump for his attempt to overturn the 2020 election and the events around january 6, the attack on the capital, he said no one is above the law. that is what the justices have been working with. they i think were skeptical of the idea of total immunity from prosecution. that may be bad news for donald they also made a distention between acts done as a private citizen for private reasons and acts done as official, as a part of the official job. that may mean they will push this back down to the lower courts, which could delay the case even further. we are already looking at a very tight timetable for jack smith the special counsel to bring this case before the election. of course, we also know, don't we, if donald trump were to win november's election, in this case still hanging over him, he could simply ask the justice department to drop it. caitriona: gary at the u.s. supreme court and manhattan, thank you both for joining us. with me now and studio is marcus childress, the former investigative council for the congressional committee
jack smith, the special counsel prosecuting donald trump for his attempt to overturn the 2020 election and the events around january 6, the attack on the capital, he said no one is above the law. that is what the justices have been working with. they i think were skeptical of the idea of total immunity from prosecution. that may be bad news for donald they also made a distention between acts done as a private citizen for private reasons and acts done as official, as a part of the official job....
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
smith's team was trying to undo 234 years of presidential president. arguing that presidents should be held criminally liable for actions they take an office. judges though, not convinced. >> there is the old... about indicting a ham sandwich. you have live experience in the justice department. you come a lot -- across a lot of cases where the u.s. attorney or another federal prosecutor really wanted to indict a case in the grand jury refused to do so. >> there are such cases yes. i think that the. >> once in a while there's an eclipse to. >> jesse: he asked why would in this create a vicious cycle of partisan presidential prosecutions and pardons? >> the concern going forward is that the system when former presidents are subject to prosecution, history tells us is not going to stop. it's going to cycle back and be used against the current president or the next president in the next president after that >> jesse: president not having immunity opens up a pandora's box. if trump gets charged does that mean bill clinton gets charged for bombing aspirin fa
smith's team was trying to undo 234 years of presidential president. arguing that presidents should be held criminally liable for actions they take an office. judges though, not convinced. >> there is the old... about indicting a ham sandwich. you have live experience in the justice department. you come a lot -- across a lot of cases where the u.s. attorney or another federal prosecutor really wanted to indict a case in the grand jury refused to do so. >> there are such cases yes. i...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
disaster for the special counsel jack smith. at least five of the court's republicans seemed eager at the very least to trump delay federal criminal trial adding that the justice who seemed to hedge the most, john roberts, also seemed to think that trump enjoys at least some immunity from criminal prosecution joining us now. chris landau. chris, is there real reason for the left to be in despair tonight? >> i think it was a good day for former president trump in the supreme court, laura. but i think that's just because he's got the law and common sense on his side. i mean, this is -- the question as you just read is whether a president can be subjected to criminal liability after leaving office for official acts, right? nobody is arguing here about the president's being immune for private acts. right? so, you know, murder, speeding, whatever. the thing is, if we cross the rubicon of saying that our presidents can be criminally charged for their official acts, we don't have a country anymore. i mean, how is a president -- how is
disaster for the special counsel jack smith. at least five of the court's republicans seemed eager at the very least to trump delay federal criminal trial adding that the justice who seemed to hedge the most, john roberts, also seemed to think that trump enjoys at least some immunity from criminal prosecution joining us now. chris landau. chris, is there real reason for the left to be in despair tonight? >> i think it was a good day for former president trump in the supreme court, laura....
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
here was a little bit of the jack smith side punching back. take a listen. >> the reason why there have not been prior criminal prosecutions is that there were not crimes. what is important is that no public official has had the absolute criminal immunity that my friend thinks of. he's supposed to be faithful to the laws of the united states and the constitution of the united states and making a mistake is not what lands you in a criminal prosecution. >> joyce, your thoughts about what he was dealing with on that bench, because as i mentioned, the emphasis on everything but now i found suspicious. the number of justices who want to talk about history and we're writing for the future and not deal with what he says there. you're never getting prosecuted for a good faith mistake. you have to have criminal intent. this is black letter law. here you're not fdr dealing with a war. you've got 20 days or whatever left, you have a president-elect lawfully certified and you're trying to steal the thing. >> so appellate argument is very different from ar
here was a little bit of the jack smith side punching back. take a listen. >> the reason why there have not been prior criminal prosecutions is that there were not crimes. what is important is that no public official has had the absolute criminal immunity that my friend thinks of. he's supposed to be faithful to the laws of the united states and the constitution of the united states and making a mistake is not what lands you in a criminal prosecution. >> joyce, your thoughts about...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
but the justices seemed so convinced that limiting the scope of what jack smith could actually try here, that they walked away feeling pretty good about it, even though there were some really remarkable moment comments in there, is paul just pointed out where his attorneys were making big concessions that we've never heard them make. >> a good point. it's interesting, elliot, that the court seemed prepare prepared to hand trump a delay and to move this case back to a lower court right now, that would be a win for trump, presumably because he wants to delay as much as possible. it would be a practical when not illegal win, right? it's there are not, there's not a majority of the supreme court that is going to rule that the foreign president is absolutely immune from criminal lawsuit. the criminal prosecution that's clear. now, they may send it and it seemed likely that there's a majority of the court wants to send it back down to lower courts for more litigation. the hearings that's a win for donald trump. it delays the trial. now, the supreme court can say that what we did the instituti
but the justices seemed so convinced that limiting the scope of what jack smith could actually try here, that they walked away feeling pretty good about it, even though there were some really remarkable moment comments in there, is paul just pointed out where his attorneys were making big concessions that we've never heard them make. >> a good point. it's interesting, elliot, that the court seemed prepare prepared to hand trump a delay and to move this case back to a lower court right...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
but, many of the justices were as concerned about the sweeping implications of what jack smith is arguing as they were what donald trump was arguing and there seems to be an interest in finding a third option. but that third option would require likely a remand and a further delay of that case. >> gillian: we kept hearing today from the dissent that -- excuse me from the prosecution that, you know, there is in common understanding that presidents are subject to criminal liability. take a listen to that side of today. >> it's baked into the constitution that any president knows that they are exposed to potential criminal prosecution. it's common ground that all former presidents have known that they could be indicted and convicted and watergate cemented that understanding. >> so, what place do you think this so-called common understanding has in the law and in this case specifically? >> well, it's not quite as clear as what the did. two nixon cases one granted absolute immunity on civil cases. and the court has never answered to what extent that extends to criminal cases. there is also the
but, many of the justices were as concerned about the sweeping implications of what jack smith is arguing as they were what donald trump was arguing and there seems to be an interest in finding a third option. but that third option would require likely a remand and a further delay of that case. >> gillian: we kept hearing today from the dissent that -- excuse me from the prosecution that, you know, there is in common understanding that presidents are subject to criminal liability. take a...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FBC
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
supreme court today majority sounded like they may limit special counsel jack smith's 2020 case against former president trump. presidential immunity. what does it mean now? >> it's interesting because it didn't seemed like a large majority of the core certainly got there has to be some residential immunity for official acts. i think before this case was brought, these cases were brought against president trump most people assumed presidents had immunity for official acts like others like the speech and debate class but these cases are extraordinary brought against the president and the arguments today suggested the president trump will give a strong ruling for majority of the supreme court that at least his official act are immune from criminal prosecution. the question becomes which official act -- >> let's show the new york times headline because even the new york times is saying it so what do you think about where you come down on this? >> i think that's right, a court majority probably have a five -- four, extension three official acts police have immunity and they're going to send
supreme court today majority sounded like they may limit special counsel jack smith's 2020 case against former president trump. presidential immunity. what does it mean now? >> it's interesting because it didn't seemed like a large majority of the core certainly got there has to be some residential immunity for official acts. i think before this case was brought, these cases were brought against president trump most people assumed presidents had immunity for official acts like others like...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i don't know if you remember, but jack smith, the special counsel, tried to get the court to intervene before the dc circuit back in december. the court said no. then when the court set this for argument that gave it two month window for it, now would probably wait another two months for a decision. the justices seemed somewhat divided today. i think it's really unlikely we would see a decision before the end of june, beginning of july, and that decision is likely going to split the baby it's going to result in a remand where there's going to be more work for the lower courts to do. i would be very surprised let' see donald trump go to trial before the november election at this point all right. >> ucla law professor rick hansen. thank you so much. good to see you. we'll be right back saving for, retirement was tough enough and navigating markets can be challenging at times. i understand that's why if fisher investments, we keep a disciplined approach with your portfolio helping you through the markets sen. downs, what about communication? we check in regularly to keep you informed whic
i don't know if you remember, but jack smith, the special counsel, tried to get the court to intervene before the dc circuit back in december. the court said no. then when the court set this for argument that gave it two month window for it, now would probably wait another two months for a decision. the justices seemed somewhat divided today. i think it's really unlikely we would see a decision before the end of june, beginning of july, and that decision is likely going to split the baby it's...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FBC
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
jack smith is trying to push, they're all trying to push these cases. alvin bragg is trying to push his case. they all want to push these cases, they want him in trial. like he is in trial today. he couldn't be sitting in front of the supreme court today. that is where he should been today listening to oral arguments because they're trying to rush everything to have him tied up which is the ultimate election interference. larry: yes, ma'am, pam bondi, gregg jarrett, thank you ever so much. switching gears we go from i have don't know from one bad to another. what is so bad about coal which the bidens now want to ban all together? let's ask rich nolan, vice president and ceo of the national mining association. rich, thanks for coming on. these latest emissions, epa emissions rules squeezed coal mans, the way, they will take out coal, oil, and natural gas, no new natural gas plants according to this too. there isn't going to be any electricity to power any economic growth in this country. i don't get it. i want to get your take, what you can do about it?
jack smith is trying to push, they're all trying to push these cases. alvin bragg is trying to push his case. they all want to push these cases, they want him in trial. like he is in trial today. he couldn't be sitting in front of the supreme court today. that is where he should been today listening to oral arguments because they're trying to rush everything to have him tied up which is the ultimate election interference. larry: yes, ma'am, pam bondi, gregg jarrett, thank you ever so much....
50
50
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 50
favorite 0
quote 1
right former president donald trump was not in the courtroom but jack smith was. the entire council team as well. you look like it is related to january 6th and today the argument was the allegations they make about the actions he took surrounding generally sixth are they subject to some kind of broad grant of presidential immunity against potential criminal liability? the justices had all kinds of quarries looking far beyond the case and thinking about how it would impact generations to come. at 1 point saying we are writing a rule for the ages, they get the historical impact on the job they will have to do with this particular case. worrying in a contentious election cycle the person who loses would immediately have to worry about their opponent tried to put them in jail if they're an incumbent who lost a reelection bid. but just as jackson was on the other side saying i'm worried about the court getting a sweeping grant of criminal immunity to any sitting president so that when he leaves he knows there is not going to be a liability. this is what she responsibl
right former president donald trump was not in the courtroom but jack smith was. the entire council team as well. you look like it is related to january 6th and today the argument was the allegations they make about the actions he took surrounding generally sixth are they subject to some kind of broad grant of presidential immunity against potential criminal liability? the justices had all kinds of quarries looking far beyond the case and thinking about how it would impact generations to come....
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
KPIX
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
supreme court's decision will determine whether special counsel jack smith can try trump for his alleged efforts to interfere with the 2020 election. >>two lower courts have already rejected trump's claims of immunity, but legal hey, it's possible the supreme court will look for a middle ground, >>>>not go the full distance >>that trump is requesting, but they might be willing to recognize a more limb. form of criminal immunity. the supreme court's decision >ryan>is expected by july >>possibility that the supreme court sends the case back to the lower court. other days, and even if the supreme court sides >ryan>with the justice department remains to be seen >>whether the special counsel have enough time to try this case before action still ahead at noon and streaming on cbs >ryan>news bay area gas prices soar >>find out which part of the bay is selling a gas gallon of gas for more than dolls and a new ruling by the epa. could be >ryan>1 of the biden administration is toughest constraints my name is douglas. i'm a writer/director and i'm still working. in the kind of work that i do, you a
supreme court's decision will determine whether special counsel jack smith can try trump for his alleged efforts to interfere with the 2020 election. >>two lower courts have already rejected trump's claims of immunity, but legal hey, it's possible the supreme court will look for a middle ground, >>>>not go the full distance >>that trump is requesting, but they might be willing to recognize a more limb. form of criminal immunity. the supreme court's decision...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
listen to michael dragon arguing earlier for special counsel jack smith than you will hear from the trump attorney john sauer. >>> if the president can be charged and put on trial and imprisoned for his most controversial decisions as soon as he leaves office, that looming threat will distort the president's decision-making cicely 1 bold and fearless action is most needed. the. >> framers knew too well the dangers of a king who could do newark -- no wrong. they therefore devised a system to check abuses of power, especially the use of official power for private gain. >> martha: joining the noun is will scharf and an attorney representing former president trump in this case joining us in a couple minutes but first with the chief legal correspondent and anchor of fox news sunday live today at the supreme court, hello shannon. >> hi martha. it was scheduled for about an hour at almost 3 today though because they had a lot to consider. it's been a crazy day out here at the supreme court. we will just work through that. the judges were taking this very seriously as they were wading through som
listen to michael dragon arguing earlier for special counsel jack smith than you will hear from the trump attorney john sauer. >>> if the president can be charged and put on trial and imprisoned for his most controversial decisions as soon as he leaves office, that looming threat will distort the president's decision-making cicely 1 bold and fearless action is most needed. the. >> framers knew too well the dangers of a king who could do newark -- no wrong. they therefore devised...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
smith case. does it go away, go forward, or a combination of the two which starts things from square one again and makes things a bit more complicated and delays it until after the election? >> dana: earlier today i asked and he mccarthy a political question. this is about presidents and presidential immunity but election year. if you are the biden white house and biden campaign how do you think they look at this and how do they want the justices to rule? >> i think they would want the justices to rule that the former president was acting not in his official capacity but as an office seeker. but two things. one is first of all, to some degree this has already been a victory for donald trump because this has delayed the start of the trial by jack smith and as a result has put him in the middle of a political campaign. we have a highly divisive electorate, highly divided with republicans on one side, democrats on the other cheering for their respective squads and as a result, it has energized presi
smith case. does it go away, go forward, or a combination of the two which starts things from square one again and makes things a bit more complicated and delays it until after the election? >> dana: earlier today i asked and he mccarthy a political question. this is about presidents and presidential immunity but election year. if you are the biden white house and biden campaign how do you think they look at this and how do they want the justices to rule? >> i think they would want...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
KGO
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
special counsel jack smith has a simple answer to all of this. he says presidents are not above the law. if they commit crime, they must be prosecuted. now, if the justices decide this case swiftly, there might be a trial in this case before the november election. but if they don't, it could be held until after the november election and perhaps even into a second trump term. if he was president he would probably have the right to stop this case altogether. robin? >> robin: terry, thank you. now to more on the nfl draft and an interview with jayden daniels. the former lsu quarterback and the heisman trophy winner expected to be the number two draft pick tonight. he sat down exclusively with our will reeve there in the motor city in detroit. good morning again, will. >> reporter: hello again, robin. still with the fans out in the cold, very excited for tonight. no more excited than jayden daniels. he's accomplished so much already in his career, but he doesn't quite know what his future holds, in terms of where he's going to work. all he knows is h
special counsel jack smith has a simple answer to all of this. he says presidents are not above the law. if they commit crime, they must be prosecuted. now, if the justices decide this case swiftly, there might be a trial in this case before the november election. but if they don't, it could be held until after the november election and perhaps even into a second trump term. if he was president he would probably have the right to stop this case altogether. robin? >> robin: terry, thank...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
KNTV
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
special counsel jack smith has urged the high court to reject mr. trump's immunity theory, and quickly. >> my office will seek a speedy trial in this matter. >> reporter: writing in court papers, a bedrock principle of our constitutional order is that no person is above the law, including the president. but the elephant in the courtroom, the impending election, as the prospect of a trial completed before november very much in doubt. >> let's talk about this claim at the supreme court today, of presidential immunity. we know that a person can't by long-standing practice in tradition, can't be prosecuted while he is in office, but this is about criminal acts allegedly taken outside of office, potentially. so how broad is this claim here? >> reporter: savannah, the claim is so broad, so vast, that i think that's why so many observed that the justices are unlikely to hand him a complete win, a complete full stop saying that he's completely immune. because if he is, then he can do anything in office, including trying to have a political rival assassinate
special counsel jack smith has urged the high court to reject mr. trump's immunity theory, and quickly. >> my office will seek a speedy trial in this matter. >> reporter: writing in court papers, a bedrock principle of our constitutional order is that no person is above the law, including the president. but the elephant in the courtroom, the impending election, as the prospect of a trial completed before november very much in doubt. >> let's talk about this claim at the...
54
54
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 54
favorite 0
quote 1
he put himself on that team to go after trump and now on the jack smith and arguing the case for jack smith today. very interesting. >> dana: we are going to have a chance at 10:00 a.m. to hear the justices and the argument. you will be inside. so you know the justices well and pay attention to a lot of this. what are you listening for today? is there anyone in particular you are expecting to weigh in heavily? >> you know i'll be keeping an eye on the chief justice. he tries to guide the court with a narrow hand in many cases, incrementally. if they find there is some scope of immunity for these particular actions where do they set the boundaries? i think listening to the questions about whether they are open to that issue of immunity and how far it might go. if we see who is trying to probe what the outer boundaries of that would be, these arguments are set for an hour but nothing else on the docket today. i expect we go well beyond that. this is a moment in history for the justices to decide. we don't know what the vote was to take up the case, who voted yes or no or who wants to he
he put himself on that team to go after trump and now on the jack smith and arguing the case for jack smith today. very interesting. >> dana: we are going to have a chance at 10:00 a.m. to hear the justices and the argument. you will be inside. so you know the justices well and pay attention to a lot of this. what are you listening for today? is there anyone in particular you are expecting to weigh in heavily? >> you know i'll be keeping an eye on the chief justice. he tries to...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FBC
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
but that being said, you know, jack smith really want withs the try this case before the election. david yeah. he's salivating matt whitaker, thank you so much for being here. good seeing you. >> good sewing you. david: it is going to be a tough day on wall street at least after the opening bell. we've got all the futures down significantly. dow is down 484, nasdaq's down 316. the opening bell's next. ♪ this is how we roll ♪ (husband) we just want to have enough money for retirement. (wife) and travel to visit our grandchildren. (fisher investments) i understand. that's why at fisher investments we start by getting to know each other. so i can learn about your family, lifestyle, goals and needs, allowing us to tailor your portfolio. (wife) what about commission-based products? (fisher investments) we don't sell those. we're a fiduciary, obligated to act in your best interest. (husband) so how do your management fees work? (fisher investments) we have a transparent fee, structured so we do better when you do better. at fisher investments, we're clearly different. everybody wants
but that being said, you know, jack smith really want withs the try this case before the election. david yeah. he's salivating matt whitaker, thank you so much for being here. good seeing you. >> good sewing you. david: it is going to be a tough day on wall street at least after the opening bell. we've got all the futures down significantly. dow is down 484, nasdaq's down 316. the opening bell's next. ♪ this is how we roll ♪ (husband) we just want to have enough money for retirement....
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
jack smith says it happened after he was president. here is what the former president said an hour and a half ago. >> we have a big case today on presidential immunity. a president has to have immunity or you have a ceremonial president. >> this case was supposed to go to trial in early may, it was delayed. arguing for special counsel is michael dreebben, who was on robert mueller's team. and john sour worked for former president trump, former law clerk to late justice scalia. if rule in favor of special counsel jack smith itten moos the trial will be back on, engines kick back on. we probably won't go to trial for several months, it's been paused at district court level. if they rule in favor of donald trump, don't expect to see a trial at all. we should have a decision by end of june, at latest, it is possible it could be in the next several weeks. it is not something that will be decided if a few days. >> bring in jonathan turley, law professor. professor turley, old saying bad case makes bad case law. are we setting up bad case law
jack smith says it happened after he was president. here is what the former president said an hour and a half ago. >> we have a big case today on presidential immunity. a president has to have immunity or you have a ceremonial president. >> this case was supposed to go to trial in early may, it was delayed. arguing for special counsel is michael dreebben, who was on robert mueller's team. and john sour worked for former president trump, former law clerk to late justice scalia. if...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
both donald trump & jack smith, their lawyers point to history the constitution, both saying that it works in their favor for donald trump's side. he says separation of powers. the idea that the three branches are independent of each other means that judges cannot sit in judgment of the former president, whereas jack smith are used that there was never any kind of criminal immunity foreseen by the framers of the constitution. any points to a more modern day precedent? that involves former president richard nixon, who was forced out of office in 1974 because of his actions during the watergate scandal and his own effort to try to ensure his reelection back in 1972 but in 1974, after he was forced out, then president gerald ford pardoned richard nixon. and that pardon jack smith argues, was a recognition that nixon could have been subject to criminal prosecution if he had not been pardoned. so those are the dueling arguments the justices will hear. but bottom line, this trial of donald trump in this particular case has already been postponed since its original march start date because
both donald trump & jack smith, their lawyers point to history the constitution, both saying that it works in their favor for donald trump's side. he says separation of powers. the idea that the three branches are independent of each other means that judges cannot sit in judgment of the former president, whereas jack smith are used that there was never any kind of criminal immunity foreseen by the framers of the constitution. any points to a more modern day precedent? that involves former...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
KPIX
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the high court's decision would determine whether or not special counsel jack smith can move forward with his case charging trump with scheming to overturn the 2020 presidential election results which trump denies. >> never recognized this sort of immunity from criminal prosecution that trump is requesting. so i think it's a pretty uphill battle for the trump side. >> reporter: if the court rules against the former president's immunity claims, his election interference trial could possibly start before the election this november. though the court could also decide to send the case back to the lower courts. legal experts say that would also add even more delays to the proceedings. >> the supreme court understands that time is of the essence here and that all sides and the public all want a prompt decision, whatever that may be. >> reporter: the supreme court's decision is expected to come by early july. the justices have multiple paths to decide this case. and how quickly the court moves today following the arguments ultimately depends on whether the justices agree on a decision. anne
the high court's decision would determine whether or not special counsel jack smith can move forward with his case charging trump with scheming to overturn the 2020 presidential election results which trump denies. >> never recognized this sort of immunity from criminal prosecution that trump is requesting. so i think it's a pretty uphill battle for the trump side. >> reporter: if the court rules against the former president's immunity claims, his election interference trial could...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
again, that's bad for jack smith. timeline. so if you're the former president, all you so we're looking for here is no bold action by the court. you don't want a decisive, sweeping decision that said the immunity. you want something either in the middle, four, four victory. i don't think any serious legal scholars think the court is going to come out and adopt an absolute immunity framework. but there is a real risk that they're going to do something in the middle at all. that's going to have this case dragging on. & you look at the timeline, will under so far the court has not moved quickly here. they have not act like this case is truly an emergency. so i don't suspect they're going to do so with their decision. >> even though a lot of it has gone under the label of expedited and emergencies but i guess those are all relative terms when it comes to the supreme as you guys well know, elliott, let's turn to arizona really quickly. is this indictment that happened overnight? is this the two-point version of georgia with the bigg
again, that's bad for jack smith. timeline. so if you're the former president, all you so we're looking for here is no bold action by the court. you don't want a decisive, sweeping decision that said the immunity. you want something either in the middle, four, four victory. i don't think any serious legal scholars think the court is going to come out and adopt an absolute immunity framework. but there is a real risk that they're going to do something in the middle at all. that's going to have...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
special counsel jack smith says trump's behavior continued after he left office. and he should be prosecuted full stop. this case was supposed to go to trial in early march. but it was delayed when the supreme court agreed to hear the case. now, arguing for the special counsel today, a man named michael dreefn, he previously worked on special counsel robert mueller's team. he is screen left. screen right is john sour. former law clerk to the late justice antonin scalia. the justices they say that they are probably going to take this case for about two hours today though it could go longer given the stakes here. if they rule in trump's favor. his case in washington, d.c. could essentially go away. if they rule against him, the motions, everything will start moving again the train will start moving for trial. several months away. we may see a trial late summer, early falls, who knows if that could be delayed further, perhaps, past the election. back to you. >> brian: big media presence there already? >> big media presence barely anybody from the public. little surpr
special counsel jack smith says trump's behavior continued after he left office. and he should be prosecuted full stop. this case was supposed to go to trial in early march. but it was delayed when the supreme court agreed to hear the case. now, arguing for the special counsel today, a man named michael dreefn, he previously worked on special counsel robert mueller's team. he is screen left. screen right is john sour. former law clerk to the late justice antonin scalia. the justices they say...