0
0.0
Feb 28, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
we'll put that to michael luttig who said it may already be too late. of those story and more when "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. i'm an active mom, but when i laughed, lifted or exercised, bladder leaks were holding me back from doing the things i loved. until, i found a bladder specialist that offered me bulkamid - a life-changing and fda approved non-drug solution for my condition called stress incontinence it really works, and the relief can last for years. take the next step at findrealrelief.com to arrange an appointment with an expert physician to determine if bulkamid is right for you. results and experiences may vary. move beyond the leaks. sometimes, the lows of bipolar depression feel darkest before dawn. with caplyta, there's a chance to let in the lyte™. caplyta is proven to deliver significant relief across bipolar depression. unlike some medicines that only treat bipolar i, caplyta treats both bipolar i and ii depression. and in clinical trials, movement disorders and weight gain were not common.
we'll put that to michael luttig who said it may already be too late. of those story and more when "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. i'm an active mom, but when i laughed, lifted or exercised, bladder leaks were holding me back from doing the things i loved. until, i found a bladder specialist that offered me bulkamid - a life-changing and fda approved non-drug solution for my condition called stress incontinence it really works, and the relief...
0
0.0
Feb 9, 2024
02/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
time judge michael luttig as well. thank you so. much i will go back to kaitlan collins. >> thanks, anderson. of course, we heard from the former president a moment ago, he had this to say about what happened in court today, which i should note was an appearance that he chose not to attend. >> i thought it was very beautiful process. i hope that democracy in this country will continue. i thought the presentation today was a very good one. i think it was well received. i hope it was well received. >> and i'm joined now by an attorney for donald trump, jim, trustee and what did you make of how the arguments went today and how -- argued it. >>> there was different levels of hostile fire as we heard before, in terms of justice gorsuch turning the tables on his own former law clerk for a minute. it was not particularly aggressive, not what i call annexed a hot bench. they got their points, now i thought there was some interesting areas that were really different from the last two folks that anderson was talking about. a couple, things nu
time judge michael luttig as well. thank you so. much i will go back to kaitlan collins. >> thanks, anderson. of course, we heard from the former president a moment ago, he had this to say about what happened in court today, which i should note was an appearance that he chose not to attend. >> i thought it was very beautiful process. i hope that democracy in this country will continue. i thought the presentation today was a very good one. i think it was well received. i hope it was...
0
0.0
Feb 7, 2024
02/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
and i think that president trump fried judge michael luttig's brain.t we have here is the issue does a president -- can a president be prosecuted by his successor for his official acts? members of congress have both civil and criminal immunity. federal judges have both civil and criminal immunity for their official acts. why wouldn't the president of the united states? doesn't this mean that trump 47 justice department can prosecute president obama for capital murder for his extra judicial drone strike of two american citizens, including a minor? the supreme court now has to take this case because this is so much bigger than president trump and their trump derangement syndrome. >> laura: sol, what do you think about this immunity claim? you hear things from both sides on this. that there is no, you know, textual evidence of broad immunity for all actions post office that you took while you were in office. but, is it clear which way the court would actually go on this ultimate question? >> the supreme court -- i don't think they goal as far as the d.c.
and i think that president trump fried judge michael luttig's brain.t we have here is the issue does a president -- can a president be prosecuted by his successor for his official acts? members of congress have both civil and criminal immunity. federal judges have both civil and criminal immunity for their official acts. why wouldn't the president of the united states? doesn't this mean that trump 47 justice department can prosecute president obama for capital murder for his extra judicial...
17
17
Feb 6, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 17
favorite 0
quote 2
joining us now is that former federal luttig. good to see you again.rgument. this is not for the supreme court to adjudicate. >> thank you very much for having me with you this evening, ali. let me begin this discussion by reference to today's decision. today's decision from the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit was historic. it's a landmark decision holding that a former president is never immune from federal prosecution for offenses committed against the united states when he or she was president of the united states. i do not expect the supreme court to review that decision by the d.c. circuit. in the d.c. circuit case, a number of my friends and former colleagues in six republican administrations prior to the trump administration filed an amicus brief with the d.c. circuit court of appeals in which we argued that a president is never immune from federal prosecution for offenses committed while he was president, but if there's one single instance in which he or she is not immune, it is where as here with the former
joining us now is that former federal luttig. good to see you again.rgument. this is not for the supreme court to adjudicate. >> thank you very much for having me with you this evening, ali. let me begin this discussion by reference to today's decision. today's decision from the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit was historic. it's a landmark decision holding that a former president is never immune from federal prosecution for offenses committed against...
0
0.0
Feb 9, 2024
02/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
it will simply have postponed it. >> judge luttig, i'm wondering what your takeaway was. i'm sure you heard from the justices on the colorado court decision. >> anderson, the first thing i would say is that i agree with every single substantive constitutional point that the professor just made. it's rare, anderson, that you can tell what the supreme court is going to do from oral argument. but sometimes, you can tell what the court is not going to do. and this is one of those times. the supreme court of the united states is not going to decide whether the former president is disqualified under section 3 of the 14th amendment. not now, and i don't believe ever. to that kicking the can down the road, professor tribe is exactly right. under our constitution, the states have the power under the electors and elections clauses to administer and conduct federal elections, including the election for the president of the united states. that is all the supreme court needs to know to say that the state of colorado had the constitutional power to disqualify the former president. but
it will simply have postponed it. >> judge luttig, i'm wondering what your takeaway was. i'm sure you heard from the justices on the colorado court decision. >> anderson, the first thing i would say is that i agree with every single substantive constitutional point that the professor just made. it's rare, anderson, that you can tell what the supreme court is going to do from oral argument. but sometimes, you can tell what the court is not going to do. and this is one of those times....
0
0.0
Feb 7, 2024
02/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i can't understand what's happening with judge luttig e personally but what about that argument is that what you deare reading and last decision? >> not at all. president trump fried ttluttig brain we have an issue of camp may president be prosecuted by his successor for his official acts members congress have civi and criminal and federal judges have civil civil andfo immunity. why would the president of the united states? does this mean the department can prosecute obama for capital murder for his droneze strike o 2 american citizens the supreme court has to take this case because this is so much bigger than president trump and the trump derangement syndrome. >> laura: what you think about this immunity claim you your things from both sides on this and there's no evidence of broad immunity for all actions while you are in office but is it clear the way the court would go on this question? d, court?preme i don't think they will go as far as the dc circuit panel went to let me make it clear, there are parts of the opinion i agree with and parts of president trump's position on total imm
i can't understand what's happening with judge luttig e personally but what about that argument is that what you deare reading and last decision? >> not at all. president trump fried ttluttig brain we have an issue of camp may president be prosecuted by his successor for his official acts members congress have civi and criminal and federal judges have civil civil andfo immunity. why would the president of the united states? does this mean the department can prosecute obama for capital...
0
0.0
Feb 29, 2024
02/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
judge luttig is driven by hatred of president trump. >> that "national enquirer" michael. >> this case was taken because it raises exceptionally important question. nixon vs. fitzgerald a guide post for the court other remedies, impeachment and that sort of thing. what the court was concerned about there was the intrusion on the authority and official function of the executive branch. that's a problem. that's a problem for criminal liability as well. if it's an official act. >> david, i think at the end we are going to see election season thrown into chaos if the democrats have their way. they want to effect the election which is classic election interference in my view. all right. david, thanks so much. the disturbing murder of laken riley has residents of her town rising up against their democrat mayor's support for sanctuary city policies. forminger trump acting ice director tom homan reacts, next. ah mornings! cough? congestion? i'm feeling better. all in one and done with new mucinex kickstart. headache? better now. new mucinex kickstart gives all-in-one and done relief with a mor
judge luttig is driven by hatred of president trump. >> that "national enquirer" michael. >> this case was taken because it raises exceptionally important question. nixon vs. fitzgerald a guide post for the court other remedies, impeachment and that sort of thing. what the court was concerned about there was the intrusion on the authority and official function of the executive branch. that's a problem. that's a problem for criminal liability as well. if it's an official...
0
0.0
Feb 10, 2024
02/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
judge luttig would name to it. really amazing.esterday's argument. >> laura: now, sol, i listened to the entire thing, justin thomas just hit it out of the park right off the bat. first one to ask a question. the lawyers representing what the colorado's supreme court was in this case that trump could be ruling, that trump could be knocked the ballot basically was trying to argue facts that weren't actually at play here and completely schooled, it looks like this could actually could be a very lopsided decision. this could be 8-1. some people saying it could be 9-0. at some point sotomayor gave up saying kagan is on that side. i have got to go with the kagan people. >> well, you have to be careful about predicting for oral argument. >> laura: no we don't. friday night. >> it's friday night? okay. it's been a long time since i heard oral argument this lopsided. i think you are right. either going to be 8-1 or 9-zip. and it's going to be on relatively narrow grounds in order that chief justice roberts can get everybody on board. but
judge luttig would name to it. really amazing.esterday's argument. >> laura: now, sol, i listened to the entire thing, justin thomas just hit it out of the park right off the bat. first one to ask a question. the lawyers representing what the colorado's supreme court was in this case that trump could be ruling, that trump could be knocked the ballot basically was trying to argue facts that weren't actually at play here and completely schooled, it looks like this could actually could be a...
30
30
Feb 8, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 30
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> so the interesting thing is, especially, judge luttig, no legitimate off-ramps.ng if you can explain that. in your view, why are there no legitimate off-ramps for the supreme juvenile court? a lot of people have said, oh, they will keep trump on the ballot because they don't want the public to lose confidence in the court. they don't want the supreme court interfering in elections. it'll make people uncomfortable. is that what this is about, or is it about whether or not donald trump engaged in insurrection and then sort of gave safety and comfort to those who participated in the insurrection alongside with him? >> it's the latter. section 3 disqualifies any person who engaged in an insurrection or rebellion against the constitution of the united states, having previously taken an oath to support the constitution. there's no question whatsoever that the former president engaged in an insurrection against the constitution when he attempted to remain in power beyond his constitutional term of four years and denied president joe biden the powers of the presidency to
. >> so the interesting thing is, especially, judge luttig, no legitimate off-ramps.ng if you can explain that. in your view, why are there no legitimate off-ramps for the supreme juvenile court? a lot of people have said, oh, they will keep trump on the ballot because they don't want the public to lose confidence in the court. they don't want the supreme court interfering in elections. it'll make people uncomfortable. is that what this is about, or is it about whether or not donald trump...
0
0.0
Feb 15, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
supreme court in this confirmation hearing, who is joined by judge michael luttig, a very noted conservative jurist, larry thompson, a great deputy trade general number two by george w. bush, and they said to the supreme court, absolutely. don't delay this. because if you grant trump's request for a delay, you will undermine our entire constitutional structure. and i suspect that that brief is gonna have a lot of close readership at the u.s. supreme court. and so, if i were a betting man right now, i would say the u.s. supreme court is not gonna hear this case, despite how important trump says it is and the like. the findings are just so powerful in the direction of the supreme court -- >> a boy. the las vegas bookies tonight, getting all this action on this path laid down by neal katyal. neal, thank you very much for joining us tonight. really appreciate it. thank you. and coming up, president biden calls out donald trump's madness after donald trump said he would encourage vladimir putin to attack and invade poland and other european allies. that's next. european allies. that's next. i tol
supreme court in this confirmation hearing, who is joined by judge michael luttig, a very noted conservative jurist, larry thompson, a great deputy trade general number two by george w. bush, and they said to the supreme court, absolutely. don't delay this. because if you grant trump's request for a delay, you will undermine our entire constitutional structure. and i suspect that that brief is gonna have a lot of close readership at the u.s. supreme court. and so, if i were a betting man right...
0
0.0
Feb 1, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
perhaps the most high-profile legal conservative offered his position, retired federal judge michael luttigmr. trump incited and therefore engaged in an armed insurrection against the express and foundational mandates that require the peaceful transfer of executive power to a newly-elected president. in doing so, mr. trump disqualified himself under section three. he added, every provision of the constitution is part of the supreme law of the land, not the inferior law of the land. that line should serve as a reminder to trump's maga enablers in congress who are engaging in performative actions for his benefit in submitting to trump's whims, no matter how ludicrous or contrary to what used to be bedrock, grand values, including "the washington post" aaron blake notes, republicans acrimonious divorce from the rule of law in determining that they can apparently just ignore the supreme court. because that's exactly what they're doing. dutifully going along with trump's demand to foment another civil war by urging states to send national guard soldiers to texas while that state simply ignores a
perhaps the most high-profile legal conservative offered his position, retired federal judge michael luttigmr. trump incited and therefore engaged in an armed insurrection against the express and foundational mandates that require the peaceful transfer of executive power to a newly-elected president. in doing so, mr. trump disqualified himself under section three. he added, every provision of the constitution is part of the supreme law of the land, not the inferior law of the land. that line...
0
0.0
Feb 7, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
prominent conservative legal scholar and former judge michael luttig called the colorado supreme courtl judicial opinion, that is unassailable in every single respect under the constitution of the united states. and he says he believes the supreme court will affirm the colorado court's decision. do you share that confidence? >> i don't. i don't think there's any world in which this supreme court with a conservative majority is going to disqualify donald trump from the ballot. how they get there is less clear, but i just don't see them taking that step. i think they will view it as a drastic step. i'm not saying i agree with that, but that's at least my prediction of what they would do. >> do you see off-ramps here? >> i think there are a number of different off-ramps. i don't see them getting into the merits of the fact finding relating to the insurrection. they may touch on the procedure and whether or not donald trump was afforded the proper process in the lower court in colorado, but i don't see them getting into the facts of whether or not he engaged in insurrection. you'll see is
prominent conservative legal scholar and former judge michael luttig called the colorado supreme courtl judicial opinion, that is unassailable in every single respect under the constitution of the united states. and he says he believes the supreme court will affirm the colorado court's decision. do you share that confidence? >> i don't. i don't think there's any world in which this supreme court with a conservative majority is going to disqualify donald trump from the ballot. how they get...
0
0.0
Feb 8, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
could take us behind the scenes on how you believe that democrats across the country and also judge luttig, a well-known republican conservative legal scholar who really originated this movement to take the 14th amendment and make this the ballot issue, how do you think they're reacting to what we are inferring from the questions, which is that the court was pretty determined not to uphold colorado's decision. >> well, i don't think that's surprising to anybody sitting in the biden campaign right now or sitting in the white house, and i think most democrats who are running these campaigns arenot making a bet on the supreme court doing something they've never done in history. today is so important not because of the politics, but because it's just a reminder of we're in this unprecedented moment of the supreme court because of the unprecedented actions of the former president and the person who is in all likelihood going to be the republican nominee. and while it wasn't a major part of argument as you've been discussing in the courtroom today, the brief that was filed by trump's team and al
could take us behind the scenes on how you believe that democrats across the country and also judge luttig, a well-known republican conservative legal scholar who really originated this movement to take the 14th amendment and make this the ballot issue, how do you think they're reacting to what we are inferring from the questions, which is that the court was pretty determined not to uphold colorado's decision. >> well, i don't think that's surprising to anybody sitting in the biden...
0
0.0
Feb 29, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
term in june, which usually ends at the very end of june or july 1st, like our friend judge michael luttig, then you're really in a crunch with respect to the calendar and if and when a trial can begin. there is also, finally, the question of department of justice policy. i've heard a number of folks on our air and other places say, wait a second, the department of justice prohibits taking steps in a case like this 60 to 90 days before an election. that's not my understanding of doj policy, which prohibits overt investigative steps, not the trying of a case. for importantly, when this case is tried will be up to judge tanya chutkan if and when the case is returned to her. in that instance, i believe that judge chutkan would proceed even if we are well into general election territory at that point. >> lisa, i caught the "hamilton" reference in there nonstop, very nice. joyce vance, you said yesterday you think it is unlikely we see this trial before the election for all the reasons that lisa just laid out here. what kind of a timeline, given your experience in the courts, is realistic for p
term in june, which usually ends at the very end of june or july 1st, like our friend judge michael luttig, then you're really in a crunch with respect to the calendar and if and when a trial can begin. there is also, finally, the question of department of justice policy. i've heard a number of folks on our air and other places say, wait a second, the department of justice prohibits taking steps in a case like this 60 to 90 days before an election. that's not my understanding of doj policy,...
0
0.0
Feb 10, 2024
02/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
he fell off the deep end long ago, the judge luttig wouldto lend his name to it. really it., really amazing. >> and nothing. nothing surprising about yesterday's argument. e t, >> now, so i listened to the entire thing. justicas just e thomas just hitk of the park right off the bat. he was the first one to ask a question. >> the lawyers representingha the what? the colorado supreme court's verdict was in this caset tre that trump could be ruling that trump could be knocked off ofe baf the ballot, basically ws trying to, you know, argue facts that, weren't actually at play here, and it was just completely schooled. >> but it looks like this could actually be a very lopsided decision. this could be eight one. some people saying it coul it ce be nine oh. but at some point it looks like even sotomayor kind gave up saying, okay, kagan's on that side. i got it. i got to go to the kagan kagan people. >> well, you have to be careful about predicting from oral arguments. oht predic, no. we down times friday nightht is is friday night. okay. it's been a long time since i've
he fell off the deep end long ago, the judge luttig wouldto lend his name to it. really it., really amazing. >> and nothing. nothing surprising about yesterday's argument. e t, >> now, so i listened to the entire thing. justicas just e thomas just hitk of the park right off the bat. he was the first one to ask a question. >> the lawyers representingha the what? the colorado supreme court's verdict was in this caset tre that trump could be ruling that trump could be knocked off...
0
0.0
Feb 18, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i made to compare loaning money to countries that maybe needs some foreign aid to you luttig need to unnamed, probably not existent athletes, is not somebody that you would want sitting in the oval office. >> because of that, saint john, nothing on that story is true. none of those things happen. the conversation with the foreign later, the loaning money to pga player, famously, don't need money. >> and the waistline. >> really, what joan mika get, this what's at the heart of that is correcting the record about the picture as living somewhere in his head. it's all that was about. but the more serious point to you and richard is about how we treat our allies. jeff to pay protection money now to the united states if you don't pay what donald trump deems appropriate is he going to stand back and let russia tanks roger country? >> yeah, the only thing that was real about that speech was the applause from the audience when he talked about, hey, we shouldn't just give the money away. it should be along. i think there is a sense here, richard and peter baker road in the times today. the mag
i made to compare loaning money to countries that maybe needs some foreign aid to you luttig need to unnamed, probably not existent athletes, is not somebody that you would want sitting in the oval office. >> because of that, saint john, nothing on that story is true. none of those things happen. the conversation with the foreign later, the loaning money to pga player, famously, don't need money. >> and the waistline. >> really, what joan mika get, this what's at the heart of...
0
0.0
Feb 19, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> i think it's interesting, molly, that you do have conservative lawyers, judge luttig, i'm thinkingd against trump but also said we need to reimagine a conservative legal movement that actually gives opportunity to people who want an alternative to all of this. but the fact that you haven't heard that from leonard leo, the fact that you haven't heard that from mitch mcconnell, what does that tell you? >> i mean, they're not very brave. right? this is such an interesting moment because you know, sometimes we're critical about mainstream reporting, we say they focus more on the odds than on the stakes. but this is a really great example of pro-democracy journalism. right? they're focusing on the stakes. they're showing us exactly what the plans are for 2024. and i think it's really important to appreciate that because that is really important. i would say the federalist society in the first trump term, they really treated trump like a useful idiot. right? he was sort of -- he did what they wanted. they got what they wanted from him. now, i mean, you could see he's sort of rejected the
. >> i think it's interesting, molly, that you do have conservative lawyers, judge luttig, i'm thinkingd against trump but also said we need to reimagine a conservative legal movement that actually gives opportunity to people who want an alternative to all of this. but the fact that you haven't heard that from leonard leo, the fact that you haven't heard that from mitch mcconnell, what does that tell you? >> i mean, they're not very brave. right? this is such an interesting moment...
0
0.0
Feb 8, 2024
02/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> judge luttig, as a judge yourself you have embraced textualism and originalism, a philosophy that share with several of the conservative justices on the supreme court. is there a way to be a texturalist and an originalist and still find that donald trump is eligible to be on the ballot in 2024? >> i do not believe there is, jake. the original comprehensive study of section 3 of the 14th amendment was done by two conservative professors. prove sews bode and michael paulson. that comprehensive study and research was done under originalism theories interpretation of the constitution, and those two professors concluded that under an originalist interpretation of section 3 of the 14th amendment the former president is disqualified. now i would hasten to add that even if one were not to interpret the constitution as an originalist, then as a texturalist only, it's also pristine clear that the former president is disqualified under section 3 for having engaged in the insurrection against the constitution of the united states. >> all right. thanks to both of you. appreciate your time and
. >> judge luttig, as a judge yourself you have embraced textualism and originalism, a philosophy that share with several of the conservative justices on the supreme court. is there a way to be a texturalist and an originalist and still find that donald trump is eligible to be on the ballot in 2024? >> i do not believe there is, jake. the original comprehensive study of section 3 of the 14th amendment was done by two conservative professors. prove sews bode and michael paulson. that...