meant for trump, is that they are now appealing to the supreme court of the united states of americad it will depend on the decision of the supreme court of the state whether they will resort to such steps other states of america, each separately, because it is a very sensitive subject, and despite the fact that the judicial branch is independent, according to the democratic prescriptions of the constitution there. of the united states of america, and these institutions are also politicized in one way or another, because they are appointed by individual political representatives, they have a lot of privileges and there is a sense of a little bit of responsibility for the decisions they make, accordingly , they are guided by what he will say now a court, probably the supreme court of the united states, after that there could be a domino effect, when one by one the states of the united states will decide that trump should not participate. in their jurisdictions , it's actually a very dangerous precedent, but i have an immediate, you know, antithesis to the processes that are going on n

most likely at the level of the supreme court of the united states of america, we'll see, but of courseomestic american politics, because there already... on january 3-4, the congress comes out, debates begin on all budgets, this is the time, here judicial decisions against trump, in his criminal cases, well, they they will most likely be there in february, but as for admission, not admission to the primaries , this starts in early january, so on january 15 iowa votes, the first state in the primary, then 8 days later new hampshire, 2 weeks later nevada and southern carolina , that’s why, in general, the active stage of the presidential race is beginning, on which i... congratulate you all, for now we probably don’t expect any special surprises from the first states in the primaries, so i think trump quite easily and calmly wins in iowa, there with a gap of 15-20% over ron desantis and all the other candidates, but in new hampshire it will of course be a little more difficult, in nevada it will be easier, south queen, we’ll see how everything comes to life by this point, well then super

supreme court of the united states of america. the russian government and our special services. the northeastern, unfortunately, neighbors tried to smear the democratic party on the eve of the midterm elections for congress in 2022. this is stated in the declassified reference of the report of the national intelligence council. in this way, the russians wanted to undermine, want to undermine the support of ukraine from the united states of america. representatives of american intelligence at... claimed that they had a high level confidence in the reliability of such a conclusion, although at the same time they did not provide any evidence of this, but i am sure that this evidence is there, and just as i am sure that the russians tried to do what the american intelligence says, well, they have it it is in the blood to offend someone very much. russia is against the involvement of ukraine in ... nato, even if it happens after 15 years, the president of the terrorist country putin said the day before, speaking at the board of the min

level of the supreme court of the united states of america, we’ll see, but of course, january will bery 3-4 , debates begin over all budgets - this time, here are judicial decisions against trump, so... in his criminal cases, they will most likely be there in february, but as for admission, non-admission of additional prices, this will start already in the beginning of january, well, on january 15th he votes iowa, the first state in the primary, then 8 days later newg. in 2 weeks nevada and south carolina, that’s why, in general, the active stage of the presidential race is beginning, on which i congratulate you all, but for now we probably don’t expect any special surprises from the first states in the primaries, so i think , that trump quite easily and calmly wins in iowa there with a margin of 15-20% from the damage of the landing party and from all other candidates, but in vyugemshire it will of course be a little more difficult for him, nivada is easier, the southern queen, let's see how everything is up to this point. that already at a fairly high level, at the level of the depu

on donald trump's claims of presidential immunity in the criminal case of united states of america versus donald trump. the special counsel and his team are asking the supreme court to grant an expedited review of trump's claims that his attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election fall within the, quote, outer primitive perimeter, end quote, of his official duties as president and easier for immune from prosecution. yesterday fog filed a brief before the supreme court urging them to stay way for the issue and let the d.c. appeals court rule on it first. in an 11-page report, smith tells the supreme court, that suggestion is misguided. the public interest in a prompt resolution of this case favors an immediate definitive decision by this court. the charges here are of the utmost gravity. the nation has a compelling interest in a decision on respondents claim of immunity from these charges, and if they are to be tried, a resolution by conviction or acquittal without undue delay, and quote. as it stands now, trump's claims of presidential immunity, which have already been rejected

supreme court of the united states america. russian government and... and the special services of our north-east, on too bad the neighbors tried to smear the democratic party ahead of the 2022 congressional midterm elections. this is stated in the declassified reference of the report of the national intelligence council. in this way , the russians wanted to undermine, want to undermine the support of ukraine from the united states of america. representatives of american intelligence emphasized that they have a high level of confidence in the reliability of such a conclusion, although at the same time they did not provide any evidence of this, but i am sure that this evidence is there, and how i am sure that the russians tried to do what the american intelligence says, because it is in their blood to offend someone very much. russia... is against the involvement of ukraine in nato, even if it happens after 15 years, the president of the terrorist country putin said the day before, speaking at the collegium of the ministry of war

november 5, 24 in the state of colorado, the supreme court of the state disqualified donald trump as for the president of the united states of america and prohibited him from participating in the state primaries, because the primaries are to be held on march 5, and this may affect trump's status in the state in the general presidential election. what is this disqualification, does it mean for the course of the presidential campaign, to what extent... it should be a precedent for this case and in general this decision, because it is about trump's involvement in the events of january 6, 2021 , when a crowd of his supporters broke into... the premises of the congress, and in fact, whether this could be the reason why trump will not be allowed to the primaries in other states, and as a result he simply will not be able to run in the presidential elections. well, mr. sergey, the answer here lies in the competence of the supreme court of the united states. if he agrees with the logic of what the court in colorado has adopted. then, in fact, you don't even have to wait for march , then, i t

in the state of colorado, the supreme court of the state disqualified donald trump as a candidate fored states of america and prohibited him from participating in the state primaries , because the primaries are to be held on march 5, and this may affect trump's status in the state in the general presidential election. . what is this disqualification, does it mean for the course of the presidential campaign, as it should be this case and this decision in general are a precedent, because we are talking about trump's involvement in the events of the sixth. on january 21, when a crowd of his supporters broke into the building of congress and, in fact, whether this could be the reason why trump will not be allowed to the primaries in other states, and as a result, he simply will not be able to swamp in the presidential elections. well, mr. sergey, the answer here lies in the competence of the supreme court of the united states. if he agrees with the logic of what the court in colorado accepted, then, then, in fact, you don't even have to wait for march, then, i think that... that in many s

aid to ukraine and the position of the united states of america, regarding the russian-ukrainian warupreme court of the state of colorado disqualified donald trump as a candidate for the presidency of the united states of america, forbidding him to participate in the state's primaries. well, the decision itself concerns. primaries, which will be held in colorado on march 5, but may affect trump's status already in the state in the general election on november 5, here is what this court decision means, how it may affect the overall result of the presidential election in the united states of america, or whether may be barred from running for office or from the state of colorado participation in the primaries. trump and other states, what does this mean? that is, it means that if trump wins the election, then either he will not be allowed to run for the election, or if he wins, his victory will not be so convincing and will not be legitimate. well, first of all, it should be said that more than 90 charges have been brought against trump in several cases, and there are both criminal and,

next election, including regarding aid to ukraine and the position of the united states of america regarding the russian-ukrainian war. the supreme court of the state of colorado disqualified donald trump as a candidate for the presidency of the united states of america and prohibited him from participating in the state primaries. well, the actual decision concerns the prairies, which will take place in colorado on march 5, but it may already affect trump's status. in the state in the general election on november 5, that's what it is means the court decision, how it can affect the overall result of the presidential election in the united states of america, or the fact that the state of colorado may ban trump and other states from running for office or participating in the primaries, what does this mean, that is, it means that if trump wins the elections, then... either he will not be allowed to participate in the elections, or if he wins, his victory will not be so convincing and will not be legitimate. well, first of all, it should be said that more than 90 charges have been brought against

now it's my pleasure to introduce the chief justice of the united states supreme court, john roberts, jr. and now another pleasure to introduce the first lady of the united states of america, dr. jill. as we start this ceremony, i would ask that everyone please rise for the presentation of the colors by the navy color guard, followed by the singing of our anthem by millicent scarlett millicent scarlett. paul. pardon. oh, say hey, can you see. oh, is it also elongate or what? so we hit at the top. it's a classically meaning who's broadcast stripes and bright. is three oh plus eight or the three points we searched worse to leave in. boosting me group. three the late that often was still there. oh see it stands tall spangled. it will even or those. easy you see. in the. thank you again millicent scarlett. and once again on behalf of national archives foundation, i want to welcome to this very, very special, our foundation. the national archives foundation has been the nonprofit partner of the national archives for over 30 years. and we are the ones that support, promote, plan and help ex

now it's my pleasure to introduce the chief justice of the united states supreme court, john roberts, now another pleasure to introduce the first lady of the united states of america, dr. jill. as we start this ceremony, i would ask that everyone please rise for the presentation of the colors by the navy color guard, followed by the singing of our anthem by millicent scarlett millicent scarlett. paul. pardon. oh, say hey, can you see. oh, is it also elongate or what? so we hit at the top. it's a classically meaning who's broadcast stripes and bright. is three oh plus eight or the three points we searched worse to leave in. boosting me group. three the late that often was still there. oh see it stands tall spangled. it will even or those. easy you see. in the. thank you again millicent scarlett. and once again on behalf of national archives foundation, i want to welcome to this very, very special, our foundation. the national archives foundation has been the nonprofit partner of the national archives for over 30 years. and we are the ones that support, promote, plan and help execute pu

of the united states. >> mr. secretary, to that point, it's been striking the kind of divide within conservative legal circles over this issue. judge luttig calls it unassailable, a model. a lot of other conservative lawyers are saying 9-0, the supreme court knocks this down, no questions asked. why? why do you think the split is? >> i think this decision is simply a plain reading of the u.s. constitution. it's a playing reading of section 13 of theth amendment. the supreme court has to take this case. i'm sure judge luttig would agree. it meets the criteria. you have conflicting decisions of the highest courts of several different states on an issue of the interpretation of the u.s. constitution. there is a matter of national importance and there is a lot of urgency to this. the supreme court has to take this. i'd be stunned if they didn't take this. and i read the decision. it is a very methodical, thoughtful, point-by-point interpretation and reading of the constitution. and to those who say that the de

president of the united states of america. the u.s. supreme court will take one look at this and say, this cannot stand. i think that is the silver lining here, it won't stand, but it is terrifying to me as an american this kind of law-fare is being waged, that courts are so presumptious they think it is up to them to decide who can be on the ballot to let democracy work. they are free to dislike donald trump, especially people who do not like donald trump should be terrified, the worst thing for them is to say the courts took him off the ballot. we should be able as american citizens to have an adult conversation and vote. why are these people so terrified that they are behinding all rules to get trump off the ballot. let the people vote. >> laura: chris, president trump will address this we believe in moments in iowa. first reaction on msnbc from the colorado secretary of state. watch. >> trump's actions are unprecedented. colorado supreme court confirmed the district court got it right, he did engage in insurrection. they s

the constitution imposes from the ballot of the united states of america. i think the u.s. supreme court will take one look at this and say well, this cannot stand so in a sense i think that's the silver lining here that it won't stand it is terrifying to me as an american that this kind of lawfare is being waged that courts are so president trumpous that they think it's up to them to decide who can be on the ballot to let democracy work. they are free dislike donald trump. especially people who tonight like donald trump should be terrified at this decision because the worst thing, frankly for them is to say the courts took him off the ballot. we should be able, as american citizens, to have an adult conversation on this and vote. why are these people so terrified that they are bending all the rules to get trump off the ballot? let the people vote. >> laura: now, chris, president trump is going to address this, we believe, in moments in iowa. but, first, we have reaction on msnbc from the colorado secretary of state. watch. >> trump's actions are unpreceden

case of united states of america versus donald j trump. >> i'm looking forward to hear that. >> the supreme court getting involved at this stage, even just to say that jack smith, we would consider what you are asking us to do. that alone is such a big deal. >> we will consider it, and we are ready to start hearing. we want your response by next week. i mean, it's happening. it's on. here we go. >> and, rachel, guess who was proven wrong today? that would be me. as of last, i think, it was thursday night, i had gotten extremely impatient with the federal appeals court process, in these cases, and i started to get the feeling that it was gonna be business as usual, and donald trump was gonna humiliate yet another governing institution, and that is the federal appeals process, and use them to his advantage, by them simply running on their normal schedule of who knows how long anything takes. and here we are tonight in a completely different place than we were when i was complaining about that. i was expecting of them, and it's not like they watch this show, so they obviously were very

case of united states of america versus donald j trump. >> i'm looking forward to hear that. >> thereme court getting involved at this stage, even just to say that jack smith, we would consider what you are asking us to do. that alone is such a big deal. >> we will consider it, and we are ready to start hearing. we want your response by next week. i mean, it's happening. it's on. here we go. >> and, rachel, guess who was proven wrong today? that would be me. as of last, i think, it was thursday night, i had gotten extremely impatient with the federal appeals court process, in these cases, and i started to get the feeling that it was gonna be business as usual, and donald trump was gonna humiliate yet another governing institution, and that is the federal appeals process, and use them to his advantage, by them simply running on their normal schedule of who knows how long anything takes. and here we are tonight in a completely different place than we were when i was complaining about that. i was expecting of them, and it's not like they watch this show, so they obviously were very, ve

or the authority of the united states of america.t stake. that's the issue that will eventually have to be decided by the supreme court of the united states. >> do you see any one of these cases as being the one that gets to the supreme court? >> well, professor tribe and i have followed and monitored the various state court -- state and federal court proceedings that are under way in several of the states, and there will be any number of others in the weeks and months ahead, and it's technical law that determines which would be the better or the best of the cases, but i'm satisfied that colorado is one of those states whose case when it eventually makes it to the supreme court of the united states would be what we lawyers call a perfect case for the supreme court to grant cert on and to decide the question. the other matter that i want to address today before we leave is this, i think that instinctively americans who think about the disqualification clause think that it is anti-democratic, and that is that the american people should

peers of the criminal offenses for which he has been charged by the united states. the supreme court understands the surpassing importance of a verdict in that trial before the voters of america vote in november. >> sir, can i just ask, isn't a delay, though, and i hear what you are saying, this isn't on the merit address, but does it not work in the favor when he is wanting to push everything back so that it can hopefully happen after the election? >> that is what i was just about to explain. there is not, as of today, a delay in the march trial that has been scheduled. now here is what has happened and here is what is going to happen between now and then. the supreme court denied the motion to expedite. the supreme court doesn't give reasons for such a decision and it did not today. but, it is fairly obvious to me and to others who follow the supreme court and the federal courts in general, that the supreme court concluded that it would allow the d. c. circuit to address the immunity question first and it will do so expeditiously. the supreme court of the united s

peers of the criminal offenses for which he has been charged by the united states. the supreme court understands the surpassing importance of a verdict in that trial before the voters of america vote in november -- >> sir, can i just ask -- i want to ask you, isn't a delay, though, something, and i hear what you're saying, this isn't on the merits, but doesn't a delay work in the favor of the former president, when he is wanting to push everything back, so that it can hopefully happen after the election? >> that's what i was just about to explain. there is not as of today, a delay in the march trial that's been scheduled now here's what has happened and here's what's going to happen between now and then. the supreme court denied the motion to expedite. the supreme court doesn't give reasons for such a decision, and it did not today. but it's fairly obvious to me, and to others, who follow the supreme court and the federal courts in general that the supreme court concluded that it would allow the d.c. circuit to address the immunity question first. and it will do so

>> the thing that really beat sow those things is the constitution of the united states of america.is crystal clear about the eligibility of insurrectionists. in other words, they are not eligible to run for anything. once they violated that oath, the only way they can become re-qualified to serve in any office, state or federal, is to be reinstated by two thirds vote of both houses of congress. it's all right there in the 14th amendment, section three. this is a situation where, just like if somebody who were 14 years old decided they wanted to run for president, the constitution says no, you can't. in the same way an insurrectionist, someone who has broken their oath in support of an insurrection, that person can no longer hold office, state or l, cil or military. >> logistics wind i was ten to look at this in terms of logistics. the timing and logistics on this,because primary bounce in colora a set to be printed on january 5th. does that mean that if we don't have a supreme court decision by then that trump's name would or would not be on the primary ballot anyway? what kind of

you've got an assault going on on the capital of the united states of america. and nothing?ing, zero? >> reporter: all of this comes as the special counsel pushes for the supreme court to weigh in on whether trump is immune to prosecution and readies for next year's trial. >> increasingly, we see jack smith cutting out every available defense to the president. >> reporter: this new phone data could help fill in the more than seven hour gap in the official records of trump's phone calls on january 6th. trump maintains he is innocent. norah? >> norah: very, very interesting, robert costa, thank you. four women offered it deeply disturbing testimony today at a senate hearing into harassment at the u.s. coast guard academy. in the words of one former lieutenant, faith in the coast guard within its own members is destroyed. cbs's scott macfarlane reports current and former officers and cadets say a culture of abuse at the academy has been covered up. >> reporter: the u.s. coast guard charged with protecting america's waterways has failed to protect its own women, according to cai

you've got an assault going on on the capitol of the united states of america. and nothing?g, zero? >> reporter: all of this comes as the special counsel pushes for the supreme court to weigh in on whether trump is immune to prosecution and readies for next year's trial. >> increasingly, we see jack smith cutting out every available defense to the president. >> reporter: this new phone e more than seven-hour gap in the official records of trump's phone calls on january 6th. trump maintains he is innocent. norah? >> norah: very, very interesting, robert costa, thank you. four women offered deeply disturbing testimony today at a senate hearing into sexual assault and harassment at the u.s. coast guard academy. in the words of one former lieutenant, faith in the coast guard within its own members is destroyed. cbs's scott macfarlane reports current and former officers and cadets say a culture of abuse at the academy has been covered up. >> reporter: the u.s. coast guard, charged with protecting america's waterways, has failed to protect its own women, according to caitlin maro,

it takes a lot of bravery to argue before the supreme court of the united states and to have people of color and women, it's just great. [applause] great. god bless america. any questions? we have about 10 minutes for questions. >> we have a question right here. questioner: yes. food commercial workers and the coalition of black trade unionists. the state legislature draws those lines. what's being done to make sure that state legislatures have a fair chance for blacks to win elections there? terri: well, clearly the question was about state legislatures, what can we do? because they're the ones who have to draw the map. sir, the reality is that we have to vote. we have to vote back people who will literally take our interests seriously. so alabama, for example, has a 2/3 republican majority. now, it didn't happen overnight. and we have to chip away at that by going to the polls and voting for people who will actually take our interests to heart. and so unfortunately the remedy is the vote. and it's the very thing that they're diluting us from having. you know, i think that racial pola

i think that the supreme court of the united states believes in the process.nd, quite frankly, i think it's better for america in the event it goes through the normal procedural channels. remember what the normal cost of events are, danny. you have a district court ruling that was in essence made, ruling that the immunity clause opportunity protect him. the president of the united states is not above the law. he has to answer for his crimes like anyone else. then what happens is it goes to a circuit court, an appellate court. jack smith, the special counsel, was trying to circum development that by taking it straight to the supreme court. i think the court rules since it's a majority of three justices, they would side with trump. no. they said, we have a process. let the d.c. circuit court evaluate it. we will then, if we deem it appropriate, saying the supreme court will evaluate it at that point. and i think if it goes through those normal channels at the end of the day, the final ruling has more confidence from the american people, and i think that's what w

, got an assault going on the capitol of the united states of america. there's nothing -- no call? nothing, zero? >> reporter: this comes as the special counsel pushes for the supreme court to weigh in on whether trump is immune to prosecution and ready for next year's trial. >> increasingly we see jack smith cutting out every available defense to the president. >> reporter: this new phone data could help fill in the more than seven-hour gap in the official records of who trump called on january 6th. trump maintains he is innocent. robert costa, cbs news, washington. >>> a former georgia election worker testified she feared for her life after rudy giuliani's false claims that she and her mother committed election fraud. wandrea moss said she received threatening and racist messages and to change her appearance after donald trump's former attorney made the claims in 2020. a judge already ruled giuliani was liable for defamation. a jury will decide how much he will have to pay the women. >>> and coming up, caught on camera, hit and runs targeting pedestria

. >>> she ushered in a new era for the united states supreme court, inspiring generations of women tooin the legal profession. today america is mourning the death of former supreme court justice sandra day o'connor. joining us with more on a remarkable woman is evan thomas, the author of the book "first: sandra day o'connor." thanks for joining us to talk about the justice here. in a career full of firsts, how did she view becoming the first woman on the court? >> she liked to say it's good to be the first, but you don't want to be the last. she knew that she couldn't screw up. you know, she was the first in 200 years, and she was very tough and confident, but she was also humble and modest. she knew that this was going to not be easy, but she took it with her usual cowgirl aplomb and immediately convinced her brothers, her new brothers on the court, that, even though she'd been just a state court of appeals judge, she knew what she was talking about. one of her colleagues wrote about a month after she got there, "she's brilliant." and she was, and she was for 24 years. >> i think one

you've got an assault going on on the capitol of the united states of america. there's nothing? no call? nothing? zero? >> reporter: all this comes as the special counsel pushes for the supreme court to weigh in on whether trump is immune to prosecution and readies for next year's trial. >> increasingly we see jack smith cutting off every available defense to the president. >> reporter: this new phone data could help fill in the more than seven-hour gap in the official records of trump's phone calls on january 6th. trump maintains he is innocent. norah. >> very, very interesting. robert costa, thank you. >>> four women offered deeply disturbing testimony at a senate hearing in sexual assault and harassment at the u.s. coast guard academy. in the words of one former lieutenant, faith in the coast guard within its own members is destroyed. cbs's scott macfarlane reports current and former officers and cadets say a culture of abuse at the academy has been covered up. >> reporter: the u.s. coast guard charged with protecting america's waterways has failed to protect its own women ac

case of united states of america versus donald j.ooking forward to hearing that. >> the supreme court getting involved at this stage. even just to say to jack smith, we will consider what you're asking us to do. that alone is such a big deal. >> we will consider it, and we're ready to start hearing. we want your response by next week. i mean, it's happening. it's on. here we go. >> rachel, guess who was proven wrong today. that would be me. >> oh. >> as of last, i think it was thursday night, i had gotten extremely impatient with the federal appeals court process in these cases and started to get the feeling that it was going to be business as usual and donald trump was going to humiliate yet another governing institution. that is the federal appeals process, and use them to his advantage, by them simply running on their normal schedule of who knows how long anything takes. here we are tonight in a completely different place than we were when i was complaining about what i was expecting of them. it's not like they watch this show, so

donald trump will be going to trial in the case of united states of america versus donald j trump, possibly on the schedule dated march 4th if the supreme court acts quickly enough in this appeal, which the court in the past is known how to do. donald trump is definitely going to trial in the case of georgia versus donald trump. donald trump will definitely go to trial the criminal case of new york versus donald trump for business fraud, and donald trump is going to trial in the criminal case of united states of america versus donald j trump in federal court in florida, where the federal judge in that case appointed by donald trump will continue to do everything she possibly can to delay the trial and held on trump in any way she possibly can. brett kavanaugh won't be doing that for donald trump. brett kavanaugh destroy donald trump's appeal in writing 25 years ago. there is no more important trump legal news tonight than the words supreme court justice brett kavanaugh wrote 25 years ago. you don't feel discussions night is andrew weissmann, former fbi general counsel former chief of the cr

i don't believe that that's appropriate in the united states of america.y, though, i am not the decider in the case. the courts are. as of right now the colorado supreme court says that he is disqualified and we'll see if the u.s. supreme court intervenes and holds otherwise. >> secretary, if you could stick with me, we need to jump over to the state department right now. secretary of state tony blinken is speaking. let's listen in. >> -- international system, more inclusive, more effective, more responsive to advancing these issues from the world bank to the g20 which will now have the african union as a permanent member. on every one of these priorities and on many others, delivering for the american people means improving the lives of people around the world. the reverse is also true, leading on these global challenges is good for americans. when we help reduce the flow of fentanyl and other synthetic drugs we're not only tackling the number one killer of americans 18 to 49 it hurts families around the world and rooting out the criminal organizations th

donald trump will be going to trial in the case of united states of america versus donald j trump, possibly on the scheduled trial date of march 4th if the supreme court acts quickly enough in this appeal, which the court in the past is known how to do. donald trump is definitely going to trial in the case of georgia versus donald trump. donald trump will definitely go to trial the criminal case of new york versus donald trump for business fraud, and donald trump is going to trial in the criminal case of united states of america versus donald j trump in federal court in florida, where the federal judge in that case appointed by donald trump will continue to do everything she possibly can to delay the trial and help donald trump in any way she possibly can. brett kavanaugh won't be doing that for donald trump. brett kavanaugh destroyed donald trump's appeal in writing 25 years ago. there is no more important trump legal news tonight than the words supreme court justice brett kavanaugh wrote 25 years ago. leading off our discussions tonight is andrew weissmann, former fbi general counsel form

it had happened in other countries, but not the united states. so all of a sudden, legions of women, not just judges and lawyers, but really women across america saw her as an icon for what women could be, and also, to use the word trailblazer is also -- is almost dismissive. she was more than a trailblazer. she really embodied someone who understood what justice meant, someone who understand what it was like to be discriminated against as a woman. of course, getting out of law school, top of her class, stanford law school, she couldn't get a job. she related that story many times over the years, not to denigrate what happened to her, but to celebrate what had happened to women afterwards. and much of that wouldn't have happened were it not for someone like sandra day o'connor. >> yeah, a brilliant, brilliant woman, nominated to the bench in 1981 by president ronald reagan. judge, thank you so much for talking with us today. really, really appreciate it. >> thank you. it's an honor to be here. >>> coming up, what to make of all the recent talk ab

tell us what this decision from the supreme court of colorado means today. >> well, it's an unconstitutional and flagrant violation of the way we conduct elections in this country. this is not the way we do things in the united states of america. we the people are the ones that select the leaders not democrat judges in back offices. the reason you i made the statement i did, it's very practical. if every republican in the cholera he dough gop pry mayor hely says we're not participating, the blatant act of election interference has no impact. i want to lead by example, saying if they're going to forcibly remove trump's name from the ballot, i would voluntarily remove myself too and called on chris christie and nikki haley and ron desantis to do the same thing. jackie: so doug, i want to get your take on this. he's protesting what happened in colorado to a certain degree and he's right, all the candidates could remove their name from the ballot and say the whole thing is a farce at this point the. you've got gavin newsom saying let's keep him on the ballot because knows he's a you blue state a

this is not the way we do thing thises in the united states of america.r leaders, not unelected cabals of democrat judges in back offices. mike: gop presidential candidate vivek ramaswamy reacting to the colorado supreme court's decision this morning on "sunday morning futures." joining me to discuss the political fallout, republican strategist from brownstein hyatt policy director greta -- and former chuck schumer policy director jim kessler. welcome to both of you. >> thank you. >> it's great to be here. mike: so, great -- that, what's the impact of colorado kicking former president trump off the ballot? >> well, i think it helps donald trump raise a lot of money in the interim. i think the ultimate way we're going to see this is donald can trump is going to be on the ballot in colorado in some way, shape or form be it a caucus or on the actual ballot. so this is really just a way for trump to raise some more money and progressive democrats to try and push back on when the supreme court ultimately has to make a decision in this case. mike: i want to pla

tell us what this decision from the supreme court of colorado means today. >> well, it's an up constitutionalation of the way we conduct elections in this country -- unconstitutional. this is not the way we do things in the united states of america. we, the people, are the ones who select our leaders, not unelected cabals of democrat judges in back offices. now, the reason i made the statement i did, maria, is very practical. if every republican in the colorado g work p primary -- gop primary also a says we're not participating, then this a blatant act of interference has no impact. so i wanted to lead by example, to say if her going to forcibly remove trump's name, then i would voluntarily remove myself too and called on chris christie, nikki haley and ron ron desantis to do the same thing. i was disappointed to hear radio silence or worse from those other candidates who wanted to still collect their delegates. i think no point in we're tolerating this level of blatant election interference, but i am a problem solver. i think that is one way the republican party can solve this problem and wi

tell us what this decision from the supreme court of colorado means today. >> well, it's an up constitutionalt violation of the way we conduct elections in this country -- unconstitutional. this is not the way we do things in the united states of america. we, the people, are the ones who select our leaders, not unelected cabals of democrat judges in back offices. now, the reason i made the statement i did, maria, is very practical. if every republican in the colorado g work p primary -- gop primary also a says we're not participating, then this a blatant act of interference has no impact. so i wanted to lead by example, to say if her going to forcibly remove trump's name, then i would voluntarily remove myself too and called on chris christie, nikki haley and ron ron desantis to do the same thing. i was disappointed to hear radio silence or worse from those other candidates who wanted to still collect their delegates. i think no point in we're tolerating this level of blatant election interference, but i am a problem solver. i think that is one way the republican party can solve this problem

tell us what this decision from the supreme court of colorado means today. >> well, it's an up constitutional the way we conduct elections in this country -- unconstitutional. this is not the way we do things in the united states of america. we, the people, are the ones who select our leaders, not unelected cabals of democrat judges in back offices. now, the reason i made the statement i did, maria, is very practical. if every republican in the colorado g work p primary -- gop primary also a says we're not participating, then this a blatant act of interference has no impact. so i wanted to lead by example, to say if her going to forcibly remove trump's name, then i would voluntarily remove myself too and called on chris christie, nikki haley and ron ron desantis to do the same thing. i was disappointed to hear radio silence or worse from those other candidates who wanted to still collect their delegates. i think no point in we're tolerating this level of blatant election interference, but i am a problem solver. i think that is one way the republican party can solve this problem and within min

america's trust and the supreme court? >> he was a paragon of virtue it was one of the most trustworthy institutions in the united states. it has really lost ground it's extremely politicized. the numbers are low not as low as congress, as an example in any viewer of this program knows the trust in congress is very low. movement the last time congress was above water in polling? >> before 1948. congress has always been in the crosshairs. everyone loves their congressperson but hates the other congressperson. and that is sort of the dynamic. but still more than it has been historically. it's in the teens at this point at least in the past is 3040 years ago it has lost ground but it's never been where you hang your name up. >> it's the website if you want to check out their work. this is a barney in fremont, michigan republican. good morning. >> good morning. i do not know why my name is barney that's not important i am a republican so i'm tax did not represented by any party they are still ruining it that is why inflation i

and he represented the united states of america in some of the most significant criminal cases that wentstanding there representing the department of justice under a republican president, sometimes representing the department of justice under a democrat president. i think that he has the respect of the justices. i have worked with him back when i was in the department. i've actually urged him to seek cert on issues where he told me no and i have also worked with him on issues where we did go to the supreme court. he is careful, institutionalist is a good word. he respects the rule of law and role of the department of justice in the rule of law and making sure that it is administered fairly and without bias and certainly not based on political motivation. so i think that he is a formidable opponent for mr. trump's lawyers including mr. sauer and others who don't have that kind of experience, don't have that kind of experience arguing in the supreme court and he simply is not as well-known to the justices as michael dreeben. i think that the justices respect him. he has won and lost cases.

i want to continue this conversation in a little while with ayman -- criminal case of united states of america versus donald trump. the special counsel and his team are asking the supreme court to grant an expedited review of trump's claims that his attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election fall within the, quote, outer perimeter, and quote, of his official duties as president, and he is therefore immune from prosecution. yesterday, trump filed -- at the supreme court urging them to stay away from the issue for now and let the d.c. appeals court ruled on it first. in an 11-page reply, trump's filing, smith tells the supreme court, quote, that suggestion is misguided. the public interest in a prompt resolution of this case favors an immediate definitive decision by this court. the charges here are of the utmost gravity. the nation has a compelling interest in a decision on respondents claim of immunity from these charges, and if they are to be tried, a resolution by conviction or acquittal without undue delay, and quote. as it stands now, trump's claims of presidential immun

this is not the way we do things in united states of america we, the people select our leaders, not unelectedback offices, the reason made statement i did very practical, if every republican in the colorado gop primary also says we're not participating, then the blatant act of election interference has no impact i want to lead by capital to say if they are going to forcibly remove trump's fame from that ballot i would voluntarily remove myself to a called on chris christie nikki haley rob desantis to do the same thing. jackie: luke reeks a stand there. >> for sure gavin newsom did too, the way of political death sentence if flats remove trump from ballot in other states right? listen, we are at point people are the fed up with politics everything is politically motivated as well as we have seen past month everything against trump is actually helping him out, also wars, russia-ukraine, middle east one thing we don't talk about as well what is happening in china, i mean people view china majority americans over half view china number one threat geopolitically, we don't talk about china taiwan r

. ♪ rock of ages >> america's first female supreme court justice sandra day o'connor remembered at theington. hundreds poured into the pews, including family, friends, former colleagues and the president of the united states. >> sandra day o'connor the daughter of the american west was a pioneer in her own right. breaking down the barriers and legal and political worlds. and the nation's consciousness. >> born in el paso, texas in 1930, she sat on the supreme court for 24 years, thanks to a nomination by president ronald reagan in 1981. she retired in january 2006. >> during her time on the bench, the moderate conservative built a power base as the swing or deciding justice in key cases. >> so help me god. >> that included the 2000 ruling in the famous bush v. gore case that settled the election. o'connor's bench colleague recalled one secret to her success often speaking first at oral arguments. thereby setting the tone. >> justice o'connor was different. her approach was let's get what's most important to me on the table at the outset. get it done. >> her youngest son sharing a priva

my story is about the united states of america.t is going on in america is a form of class warfare. host: we are talking today about former president trump's legal challenges and the supreme court. you have thoughts on that. -- on that? caller: yes, trump is a white nationalist. could call it what's a purpose you are whatever, but actually there is class warfare going on in america. the republican party and the white race of this country want to say america is a white nation. the republican party is not an inclusive party. the democrats are an inclusive party. it is about white nationalist and they want to leave the country and call it a white nation, which is led by white people that want america to be called a white nation. host: ok, thank you. steve is in bismarck, north dakota, on our independent like a good good morning. caller: morning. yeah. the democrats hate trump so bad that if we do not get trump back in there, it will not be america anymore. i just flew from washington, where barely anybody speaks english anymore. i kid

my story is about the united states of america.hat is going on in america is a form of class warfare. host: we are talking today about former president trump's legal challenges and the supreme court. you have thoughts on that. -- on that? caller: yes, trump is a white nationalist. could call it what's a purpose you are whatever, but actually there is class warfare going on in america. the republican party and the white race of this country want to say america is a white nation. the republican party is not an inclusive party. the democrats are an inclusive party. it is about white nationalist and they want to leave the country and call it a white nation, which is led by white people that want america to be called a white nation. host: ok, thank you. steve is in bismarck, north dakota, on our independent like a good good morning. caller: morning. yeah. the democrats hate trump so bad that if we do not get trump back in there, it will not be america anymore. i just flew from washington, where barely anybody speaks english anymore. i k