0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
one of the other ironies is brett kavanaugh. he worked for ken starr, and yet he was saying, if you prosecute, you're just going to hurt -- >> one of the most risible is kavanaugh, gorsuch, and alito very worried about political prosecution. very worried presidents would be prosecuted, and that was infuriating because brett kavanaugh came to providence working for ken starr, who took a bill clinton land deal and dug it into monica lewinsky's closet. all of a sudden he's considered about political prosecutions. it's hypocritical at the maximum. who is going to stop them, though? they act with impunity just like trump does. because just like trump, they know nobody will stop them. >> the thing that also is really infuriating is every time justice jackson or justice kagan or justin sotomayor tried to get into the facts of this case, and every time the lawyer for jack smith's office tried to get into the substance, they would cut them off. they didn't want to hear the actual substance of the case. >> i don't want to talk about the s
one of the other ironies is brett kavanaugh. he worked for ken starr, and yet he was saying, if you prosecute, you're just going to hurt -- >> one of the most risible is kavanaugh, gorsuch, and alito very worried about political prosecution. very worried presidents would be prosecuted, and that was infuriating because brett kavanaugh came to providence working for ken starr, who took a bill clinton land deal and dug it into monica lewinsky's closet. all of a sudden he's considered about...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
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 presidential election, the true threat to democracy is the justice department effort to hold him accountable for that act, and i did not expect this kind of minimization of january 6th that we saw from the justices. my sense is that the conservative bloc just did not think that the insurrection at the capital was that big of a deal. instead of hearing concern about what it would mean to let the president off scott free for allegedly plotting and facilitating this violent election subversion, these justices try to say, let's talk about the abstract principles, don't we need presidents to act boldly and fearlessly? as though we have not seen a lesson in what happens when a president thinks he's unaccountable, and is if we are not here in this hearing, in this case, to try to decide whether or not, as a democr
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 presidential election, the true threat to democracy is the justice department effort to hold him accountable for that act, and i did not expect this kind of minimization of january 6th that we saw from the justices. my sense is that the conservative bloc just did...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
brett kavanaugh, sam alito and clarence thomas think it's unconstitutional. brett kavanaugh sounded outraged at its very existence, and that left the four women justices to clean up the mess with the great hypothetical you just played, some really searching questions from justice barrett about the line that trump's attorney was trying to draw here, but they are just four votes and at the end of the day, i think there are clearly at least five votes to prevent this trial from moving forward anytime soon. >> so, carol, part of the arguments today center on what is an official act, what is a not official act, what is core to the presidency, and what is not core to the presidency. in your coverage of january 6th, the lead up to january 6th and the aftermath of it, how did you view those arguments today? how did you hear that questioning? >> well, first i thought it was really interesting the way the very very experienced and perfectionist appellate counsel for the special counsel, mike breeben presented the way in which these things actually go down in trial. the
brett kavanaugh, sam alito and clarence thomas think it's unconstitutional. brett kavanaugh sounded outraged at its very existence, and that left the four women justices to clean up the mess with the great hypothetical you just played, some really searching questions from justice barrett about the line that trump's attorney was trying to draw here, but they are just four votes and at the end of the day, i think there are clearly at least five votes to prevent this trial from moving forward...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i think their number one goal will be to get john roberts, brett kavanaugh, and aimee coney barrett onboard with a decision that is firm and sent back down to the lower courts to kick this trial back into motion. with those three conservatives they are clearly the ones to watch. i think thomas and aleto have staked out a pretty strong pro-trump position. gorsuch is somewhere in between. i think for chief justice roberts especially he probably recognizes at this point what that rolling stone article pointed out, which is that team trump has pulled off the heist. the supreme court has slow walked this case as compared to the ballots removal case from earlier this term, the nixon cases in the 1970s during watergate. they have ensured, i think, that this trial will not happen before november, before election day. and, you know, when john roberts is embarrassed by a case, sometimes he kind of goes quiet. he doesn't say anything. and so one thing i'll be looking to is whether the chief justice mostly keeps his mouth shut or whether he tries to direct arguments towards some kind of consensus posit
i think their number one goal will be to get john roberts, brett kavanaugh, and aimee coney barrett onboard with a decision that is firm and sent back down to the lower courts to kick this trial back into motion. with those three conservatives they are clearly the ones to watch. i think thomas and aleto have staked out a pretty strong pro-trump position. gorsuch is somewhere in between. i think for chief justice roberts especially he probably recognizes at this point what that rolling stone...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i think their number one goal will be to get john roberts, brett kavanaugh and amy coney barrett on board with a decision that is quick and firm and can be sent down to the lower courts to kick this in motion. those three conservatives are the ones to watch. thomas alito has staked out a strong pro trump position. gorsuch in between. but for roberts he probably recognizes at this point what the rolling stone article pointed out. team trump has pulled off the heist. the supreme court has slow walked this case as compared to the ballots removal case from earlier this term. the nixon cases in the 1970s during water gate. they ensured this trial will not happen before november before election day. and you know, when john roberts is embarrassed by a case, sometimes he goes quiet. he doesn't say anything. so one thing i will be looking to is whether the chief justice mostly keeps his mouth shut or whether he trying to direct arguments toward some kind of consensus position. >> i know the supreme court is quote unquote inpenetrable and don't pay attention to press. and are not victim to whatever
i think their number one goal will be to get john roberts, brett kavanaugh and amy coney barrett on board with a decision that is quick and firm and can be sent down to the lower courts to kick this in motion. those three conservatives are the ones to watch. thomas alito has staked out a strong pro trump position. gorsuch in between. but for roberts he probably recognizes at this point what the rolling stone article pointed out. team trump has pulled off the heist. the supreme court has slow...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
justice brett kavanaugh and samuel alito saying prosecutors, judges, grand juries right at home in a trump social media feed about how there is not really a rule of law in this country and what looks like our supposed legal system is really just corrupt people out to get donald trump. the conservative justices today were absolutely and consistently unwilling to discuss trump's alleged crimes as laid out in the indictment that led to this case. to the point that it became almost a comedic gymnastic effort at avoidance between justice alito and the lawyer for special counsel jack smith. >> if the court has concerns about the robustness of it, i would suggest looking at the charges in this case. >> well i'm going to talk about this in the abstract. >> conspiracies to defraud the united states with respect to one of the most important functions, namely the certification of the next president. >> well i don't want to dispute that particular application of that, of 371 conspiracy to defraud the united states. >> it is difficult to think of a more critical function than the certification of
justice brett kavanaugh and samuel alito saying prosecutors, judges, grand juries right at home in a trump social media feed about how there is not really a rule of law in this country and what looks like our supposed legal system is really just corrupt people out to get donald trump. the conservative justices today were absolutely and consistently unwilling to discuss trump's alleged crimes as laid out in the indictment that led to this case. to the point that it became almost a comedic...
0
0.0
Apr 28, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
john robertson and brett kavanaugh also asked some challenging questions. maybe whenever moses up for grabs, but we know that the supreme court let idaho's law go into effect back in january, which signals at least at the time, the court was prepared to side with idaho. there is nothing eye-opening in the oral argument that convinces me they changed their minds, that they're going to win this case. what is interesting is how idaho will win this case. there was not really a cohesive theory that the other conservative justices had settled on. i think the substance of the opinion, how big they are going to go, i think we may need to wait until june to find out. >> okay, let's get into one of the major points for the conservative justices with that concept of fetal personhood. depending on how they rule, could they give more legal credibility to this theory? >> they could. fetal personhood is a theory generally providing the word person in various legal texts, specifically the constitution, applies from the moment an egg is fertilized. this is primarily a const
john robertson and brett kavanaugh also asked some challenging questions. maybe whenever moses up for grabs, but we know that the supreme court let idaho's law go into effect back in january, which signals at least at the time, the court was prepared to side with idaho. there is nothing eye-opening in the oral argument that convinces me they changed their minds, that they're going to win this case. what is interesting is how idaho will win this case. there was not really a cohesive theory that...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i think brett kavanaugh has an issue that he was made a national laughing stock by matt damon on snl. i think that affects him. i think that is coney barrett and gorsuch, policy comes before everything including democracy. >> including democracy. joyce, drebin, the lawyer jack smith selected, in his lawyerly way he punched back. if you listened closely it was logical. i don't know listening today that he moved the members he needed. maybe barrett was in the middle from what i could hear. 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
i think brett kavanaugh has an issue that he was made a national laughing stock by matt damon on snl. i think that affects him. i think that is coney barrett and gorsuch, policy comes before everything including democracy. >> including democracy. joyce, drebin, the lawyer jack smith selected, in his lawyerly way he punched back. if you listened closely it was logical. i don't know listening today that he moved the members he needed. maybe barrett was in the middle from what i could hear....
0
0.0
Apr 9, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i testified against brett kavanaugh when he was nominated to the united states supreme court. i said that he would be a reliable vote to overturn roe v. wade. i was laughed at. but i was right. we cannot continue to be surprised. they are playing in our faces. we know what they're going to do. we need to act now. this map looks horrible. it's not just arizona that's reintroducing this new/old law from 1864. there's an 1849 law that is going to be used in wisconsin unless a court steps in and stops it. michigan repealed its law. this is happening all over the country. it is go time. >> president biden tweeting trump did this, but trump did it to melissa's point, senator burch, openly. i mean, every single member that he put on the supreme court lied in their hearings, but it was a lie that was easy to catch. it was very clear that the six people who were overturned roe were going to do it, and i mean, i wonder if republican voters in your state are ever going to catch up to the fact that every single republican is going to vote to do it. you give the united states senate to rep
i testified against brett kavanaugh when he was nominated to the united states supreme court. i said that he would be a reliable vote to overturn roe v. wade. i was laughed at. but i was right. we cannot continue to be surprised. they are playing in our faces. we know what they're going to do. we need to act now. this map looks horrible. it's not just arizona that's reintroducing this new/old law from 1864. there's an 1849 law that is going to be used in wisconsin unless a court steps in and...
0
0.0
Apr 21, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
that would be the chief, that would be judge coney barrett and that would be judge brett kavanaugh. and what they ask and how they appear at the hearing is going to be critical. >> i want to send the case for a second because when it was the appellate court that was, we saw the oral arguments, they were stunningly interesting because most people don't listen to the things you can't see the video on but you her donald trump's lawyer arguing about why the president requires immunity, because he will be penalized by his opponents as soon as he's out of office. the line of questioning came up with the judge about seal team six and assigning somebody -- seal team six to murder someone -- became a question of, as jennifer rubin says, you can't be held for me and for all things. it seems the appeals court was not convinced of that thing. do you think it would be different if the same argument came up with the supreme court? >> i'm glad you brought up that example because much was made of that. and i might have a slightly different view of that, which is, one of the area -- here's what we k
that would be the chief, that would be judge coney barrett and that would be judge brett kavanaugh. and what they ask and how they appear at the hearing is going to be critical. >> i want to send the case for a second because when it was the appellate court that was, we saw the oral arguments, they were stunningly interesting because most people don't listen to the things you can't see the video on but you her donald trump's lawyer arguing about why the president requires immunity,...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
did not get a lot of purchase with the conservative justices, because the conservatives, especially brett kavanaugh, where pitching this idea that there are these other article two powers that are not specifically mentioned, that are somewhere in the penumbras of the constitution, that a president gets to wield without any kind of oversight or accountability. and that this case is really about sussing those powers out and shielding them from prosecution. and, you know, i think it's really ironic. in overturning roe v wade, the supreme court began by saying the word abortion doesn't appear in the constitution. well, the term presidential immunity certainly doesn't appear in the constitution, and yet the conservative justices, much to i think brown jackson's dismay, kept pressing this notion that it exists somewhere and it should, at a minimum, prevent the jury from considering some of trump's actions leading up to january 6th that were somehow related to these mysterious article two the powers that are not laid out specifically in the constitution. like removing members of the department o
did not get a lot of purchase with the conservative justices, because the conservatives, especially brett kavanaugh, where pitching this idea that there are these other article two powers that are not specifically mentioned, that are somewhere in the penumbras of the constitution, that a president gets to wield without any kind of oversight or accountability. and that this case is really about sussing those powers out and shielding them from prosecution. and, you know, i think it's really...
0
0.0
Apr 24, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
it's hard to tell how some of the really crucial justices, particularly john roberts and brett kavanaugh, where they landed today. i can tell you, i'm trying to think of a more gendered argument. i can't in my entire life think of an argument in which every single woman, including amy coney barrett, including the solicitor general elizabeth prelogger was talking about preeclampsia, was talking about ectopic pregnant, blood, what it is to be helicoptered out of the states and you had every single male justice, and as you heard the attorney for the state of ohio, talking about the hyde amendment, talking about the spending clause, talking about these unbelievably in some cases not briefed legal questions so they wouldn't have to talk about women's health. it was quite staggering the divide between what one-half of the court was talking about today and the other was like nothing i have ever witnessed, including in dobbs. >> it was so remarkable listening to justice sotomayor and justice amy coney barrett go back and forth with the attorney for idaho there talking about cases where the docto
it's hard to tell how some of the really crucial justices, particularly john roberts and brett kavanaugh, where they landed today. i can tell you, i'm trying to think of a more gendered argument. i can't in my entire life think of an argument in which every single woman, including amy coney barrett, including the solicitor general elizabeth prelogger was talking about preeclampsia, was talking about ectopic pregnant, blood, what it is to be helicoptered out of the states and you had every...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
kavanaugh, samuel alito, corsets, thomas in search of a lifeline for donald trump. that was embarrassing. much of it seemed to be kind of like a congressional hearing. they didn't want to talk about this case. they just wanted the hypotheticals in the air and almost draft a new law for some kind of immunity. but, jackson got to the point. all they have to do is our job and our job is to decide the case before us and on the fact before us, there is no plausible case for immunity. if we take a step back that is something the court could and should have done back in december so we could now be maybe in closing arguments in this trial. it is a shameful performance by the court. basically buying the time that donald trump wanted. >> i was just going to add, lawrence, i do think that neal katyal and andrew wiseman are right that it might be a silver lining, or at least a half silver lining that is if justice of barrett's repeated point that we could decide this immediately and have a hearing quickly on the question of where the line between official acts and private campa
kavanaugh, samuel alito, corsets, thomas in search of a lifeline for donald trump. that was embarrassing. much of it seemed to be kind of like a congressional hearing. they didn't want to talk about this case. they just wanted the hypotheticals in the air and almost draft a new law for some kind of immunity. but, jackson got to the point. all they have to do is our job and our job is to decide the case before us and on the fact before us, there is no plausible case for immunity. if we take a...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
for justices like samuel alito and maybe brett kavanaugh and definitely neil gorsuch, it seemed clear they are on board with the desire for that kind of delay. what we might call the wait, wait, don't ever tell me approach. listen here as justice ketanji brown jackson sort of gets trumps lawyers on the ropes here. he is finding it difficult to answer questions about the seemingly extreme consequences of this immunity regime he is proposing. she really has him on the ropes, but listen at the end. as conservative justice neil gorsuch swoops in to save trump's lawyer. to give him a better idea. to suggest that maybe a delay would be a good idea to give everybody a way out of the sand on to step two. >> when you are giving your opening statements, you are talking about, you know, you suggested that the lack of immunity and possibility of prosecution in the presidential context is like an innovation and i understood it to be the status quo. i mean, i understood that every president from the beginning of time, essentially, has understood that there was a threat of prosecution and they have
for justices like samuel alito and maybe brett kavanaugh and definitely neil gorsuch, it seemed clear they are on board with the desire for that kind of delay. what we might call the wait, wait, don't ever tell me approach. listen here as justice ketanji brown jackson sort of gets trumps lawyers on the ropes here. he is finding it difficult to answer questions about the seemingly extreme consequences of this immunity regime he is proposing. she really has him on the ropes, but listen at the...