they are just ignoring the law. they are defying the law. there is a reason they are doing that. there is a reason they are defying the law. the reason you don't want observers there is because you are doing something you don't want to be observed. i am angry and i think the american people are angry because by throwing the observers out and clouding the vote counting in a shroud of darkness and setting the stage to potentially steal election not just from the president, but from over 60 million people across this country come all across this country. it is lawless and they need to follow the law. >> sean: it really is that simple. how are americans ever to have, and whichever way the election comes out, i'm for free open elections. we are the home of microsoft, silicon valley, and microsoft. do you think that we could come up with a better system than this system with last-minute millions of ballots being sent out and no observers of the count when the law requires it? tell me legally, how does this play out? is that the state legislatures?

that is how i understand the law. we will follow the law. that is all we have asked for all along, whether it comes to how we vote, we just want everyone to follow the law. that is my understanding of the law. others may have different opinions of it. at the end of the day, let the process unfold and we will all follow the law. we are governed by law. we don't choose. we will follow the law. >> i'm sorry. one second. i want to make sure i understood what you said. certified bys in, the department of state, then the governor, correct? >> correct. >> what role does the legislature get to play in this? >> under normal circumstances, none. >> under any circumstance? >> you are going down a rabbit hole we don't need to go down. we are trying to get the vote tabulated and get a winner. party submits electors to the governor. the secretary of state will certify the winter. each party can challenge that. challenges will go through the court process. once that process ends, then certification stands, reversed, then the governor appoints those elector

do you no, no, no, it's in the basic law. they must obey hong kong law. when i said this, it is not clear yet what any new national security agency would be responsible for . it could simply be responsible for public education, publicized here and promotion. you know, you cannot come to the conclusion that they are, they will be enforcing hong kong law. that's what they bring. that's what they do when they bring in the national security organs of the central police. government is a central people's government. that's what they are looking for. education is it, you don't know that again, you aren't, you, and you have no, no factual basis for making those sort of statements you are simply making are sweeping allegations based on your own assumptions and bias when there's no assumptions and bias. when you look at how the national security organs of the central people's government operate when they're in on the mainland. i mean, we're not talking about mainland, we're talking about one country 2 systems. let's come back to hong kong. it doesn't look as though

part of it is about law enforcement. that is what i am going to focus on. ,yu, in his book essay they wrote, he can "president trump ultimately order the end of any investigation, even one into his own white house." practices in the white house do not comport with these widely held views of the unitary executive. i will give you six examples. first, volume two of the mueller --ort, the most shocking of revelation of which is the president tried to get his andrdinates to fire mueller utterly failed because those subordinates would not carry out those wishes. not, not know why they did but it probably had to do with some combination of law, the interference -- noninterference in the white house. it is a remarkable episode. i will give five examples that involve attorney general barr, who is obviously a proponent of a broad conception of the unitary executive. at his confirmation hearings, he acknowledged a presidential pardon to prevent testimony for criminal obstruction of justice. in his famous obstruction of justice mam

law and choose it and not follow the law. our law passed by the general assembly in a bipartisan fashion and signed by governor wolf says election day ends 8 p.m.. if your ballot is not here by 8 p.m. on tuesday other than a military overseas alec, if it's not here by eight p.m. on tuesday, it does not count. and if there is a defect, there's no remedy for the defect . for the secretary of state to send out guidance to allow defect, to rectify that that is not consistent with the statute and not consistent with the supreme court decision as was authored by act fair, that there is no remedy. legal ballots will count and that is very important. every legal ballot -- >> next up, we have nicholas. do you want to unmute? >> thank you so much. appreciate you taking questions. right now, i was wondering if you know how many counties in pennsylvania did not implement rejectedance for the mail-in ballots to allow people to vote by provisional ballot instead and how many counties did implement that. then based on those numbers, do you

it is against the law in every state. you have to demonstrate, generally, for voting, that the person is impersonating a legitimate voter. so, again, an individual is not likely to commit that crime for the opportunity of voting in one election, knowing it will not actually change the outcome. for i would just ask you all to relax and let the process unfold . hopefully, we will get results, but we are not there as of yet. this was the most passionate election in my lifetime. the voter turnout proves that. we could have had one or two results we were hoping for. ort president trump wins, vice president biden, but what we did not want was a disputed election. unfortunately, the actions of the department of state have brought that into question. they spent the last few months doing everything they can to ensure the security of the process. i have no knowledge of any voter fraud. i have no knowledge of any deed other than the process. wins -- no matter who wins, you will have a population without faith in the result. that is

and judicial nominations, election law, federal criminal law, ethics comiance and a whole lot more. my experience with sean is devastated to m he's not only an exceptionally talented lawyer but also someone deeply committed to the rulef law a he will be prepared to hit today or ground runningn day one as commissioner and i hav complete confidence that he will faithfully apply the law fairly and neutrally. i would also note that sean and his wife ellen are expecting a baby this winter. and so these are propitious times in the cksey household. i'm proud to introduce a friend, sean. >> thank you, senator cruz. three nominees, two babies on thes, way into of these familie. earlier this year our committee gathered to confirm the nomineeq to restore a quorum at the ftc and sends that confirmation of commissioner, they once again lost a quorum with the resignation of commissioner hunter in july of this year and the confirmation of these three nominees before the committee today will restore a quorum at the ftc but more important leave the confirmation that these three nominees would restor

it's in the basic law. they must obey hong kong law. what i said there is, it is not clear yet what any new national security agency would be responsible for . it could simply be responsible for public education publicized here and promotion . you know, you cannot come to the conclusion that they are, they will be enforcing hong kong law. that's what they bring. that's what they do when they bring in their national security organs of the central police government does it. it was sent to people's government. that's what they are looking for. education is it, you don't know that again, you aren't, you and you have no, no factual basis for making those sort of statements you are simply making are sweeping allegations based on your own assumptions and bias. but there's no assumptions and bias when you look at how the national security organs of the central people's government operate when they're in on the mainland. we're not talking about mainland, we're talking about one country 2 systems. let's come back to hong kong. it doesn't look as

it's not just one law or a handful of laws. it's hundreds of laws that are amended and strengthened overtime. >> can you speak a little bit about the laws that codified slavery here in virginia, or anywhere? >> before we talked about the laws. there are a couple of cases that set a precedent. what is in 16 40, and it involves three men incertitude, one was african mother by the name of john, punch the other european descent, and scotch men. so they were all in servitude. they ran from virginia to maryland, they were cut and return to virginia. so they all committed the same crime though. they were runways. they got caught together. they did the same thing. you begin to see racial differences in treatment with the case. where victor and gregory were -- one additional year and the colony of virginia three years. john was me to serve his owner and his owners besides or ears for the rest of his natural life wherever they lived. >> and john punch was black? >> john punch was black. he's referenced as african in this record. you've a

new york passed a green light law, elise tonic said it's going to hinder law enforcement. the president retweet that he makes multiple statement about punishing actuaries state. and you are a cities like new york city and new york state and then after the actual enactment of the green light law which came at the end of last year , this action is taken on five understand what your understanding and your colleagues understanding was based on if it wasn't based on any dive that was done at the time that new york state residents were banned from the program. >> thank you madame chairwoman. from my perspective and i can tell you again from the cdp perspective, what we were basing our understanding on and the lack of anything that told us at the time that required anything further than what we had been doing for years candidly in a very complex it exchange if you will by virtue of what is transmitted by 50 states, territories and the life that is very unique into return for specifically trusted traveler programs, there is nothing that made agency at the time readilyaware of any

david: famous law professor, one of the best known and highly regarded sort of liberal law professorsf his era had , written great constitutional law textbooks. i remember him early on as an advocate in the supreme court. he had some very good arguments and some not so good arguments. the good thing about larry trot was that he was really so smart and so learned on constitutional law that there were certain amount of cases where the justices would sit back and listen to him, which they don't do too often. he was a liberal professor. and he was not going to have a lot of sway with the conservative justices. and so he was in many cases he had run into a real clash with rehnquist and scalia and the conservative members of the court. susan: the court as i hope most c-span listeners and viewers know does not allow video of its proceedings. but even at the time they were audiotaping their oral arguments. and we have a clip of both ted olson and lawrence trot making their arguments before the 2000 rehnquist court on bush vs. palm beach county canvasing authority. let's listen and have you ta

it's in the basic law. they must obey hong kong law. what i said there is, it is not clear yet what any new national security agency would be responsible for . it could simply be responsible for public education, publish it in promotion. you know, you cannot come to the conclusion that they are, they will be enforcing hong kong law. that's what they bring. that's what they do when they bring in their national security organs of the central police government does it. it was sent to people's government. that's what they are looking for. education is it, you don't know that again, you aren't, you, and you have no, no factual basis for making those sort of statements you are simply making are sweeping allegations based on your own assumptions and bias when there's no assumptions and bias. when you look at how the national security organs of the central people's government operate when they're in on the mainland, and we're not talking about mainland, we're talking about one country 2 systems. let's come back to hong kong. it doesn't look as

nathan law. is there no way for the pro-democracy movement to negotiate now with the hong kong government or has that door closed for good? i think if we look at asco, elating aggressive behavior from the central government, that is qualification of the legislators are sweeping national, national security law and order rest as they have made. there are no cites of them reeling to concede any grounds. they have been doing a lot of brutal suppression in hong kong. so i don't think there is a room for the gauche ation. rather there's actually room for the international committee to act, to really hot china accountable. what's actually left for the pro-democracy movement on the ground, symbolic protests, lack of cooperation, civil disobedience. what form is the protest going to take? now now that china has narrowed your scope for movement. social movement is in the form of a pendulum, or we have our highest point last year, where going rather to a low point. now, i think for us, for hong kong, people

at hanford law. leadingone of the authorities on supreme court practice and he has argued over three dozen cases in that court. he was the winning advocate in crawford v. washington. involving the hearsay exception in criminal prosecutions. in riley against california on smartphone privacy protection rights. and he was one of the plaintiffs counsel in obergefell versus hudson. jeff is a graduate of duke and michigan law and he clerked for the late stephen reinhardt on the court of appeals and for justice stevens. to his left is kathleen hartman. a partner in law 4 -- she has a private practice representing clayton and that plaintiffs and defendants and high-stakes litigation. during the obama administration -- and theas deputy department of justice. she is a graduate of harvard college and law school and andked for merrick garland as you may have guessed also for justice stevens. finally on the far left of the panel which is not a phrase he will hear very often is daniel breasts -- brass. who is nomi

of the power to create laws on the execution of those laws could be vested according to the first words of article two, and that a praise the didn't of the unit -- president of the united states and not multiple president and congress shouldn't be able to control that on the constraints to remove. i will say one more thing about the previous discussion of the president's responsibility to obey criminal laws. i don't agree that if anybody makes the argument that if the president is failing faithfully to execute the laws, that he is a criminal, because people argue all the time that the president should enforce this law in a certain way or should enforce this law. it has to be more complicated than that. i did write an opinion or testimony and when a president violates the criminal statute, he could be indicted while in office. i know there has been an opinion that says he cannot. i went through the constitution and i could not find a constraint on the authority to indict a president, if there was a clear violation of a generally applicable law. not something congress comes up with becaus

so you cannot defend the rule of law by infringing the rule of law.pean parliament, let me also add that it is a political body which had a resolution which itself infringed their own procedural rules, because abstentions were not ta ken into account. hungary challenged its decision. the court case is still pending. in a normal, ordinary rule of law, we should wait for the result. we should wait for thejudgement that is still to come, maybe early next year. so i see only that institutions are not actually abiding to the rule of law, which should also refer to them. yet you... all in all, this historic package should be launched as soon as possible, and the money should be given to those who are most in need. and moral responsibility lies with those who are actually pressuring ideological blackmailing in the name of this valuable and really precious principle of rule of law. minister, you're putting an awful lot of information out there, some of which, for some people watching this around the world, will be a little complex to take in. but the november

for following the law and not violating the law like their counties? if i were in the county, i would look at the law and the law said, you you can't cure a ballot. in the secretary says, it is ok to cure a ballot. as a good lawyer, i say to my client, the secretary doesn't mean anything. she can't very the law. it isn't some technical law like, is it three days or four days, it is can you fix the ballot? and it is invalid. that is the substance of the law. and i would tell my client, don't do it. goingt know what you're to accomplish by suing those two counties. they didn't do anything wrong. the counties that did something wrong are the counties that buried the law to make it easier to accumulate enormous numbers of illegal votes. they say we don't know how people voted. they do know that in philadelphia, the vote was for biden. it is ridiculous to say we don't know what would happen. it was equal over the entire state, what were they doing all over the state? the reality is this was a deliberate plan to do this. and to say that we didn't allege thes

they have their own antitrust laws and the power to enforce the federal laws with the clayton act i mentioned before. and with that distinction and with the enforcement thing to do and when large corporations notify the federal agencies and there is a fair amount of time that would be quickly to take a deeper look at a second request to what the deal go through it with a second request to do interviews or what not and fortunately to say to investigate this anti- competitive they have to win. and the judges abide in so strongly and we saw that recently with a lawsuit against the t mobile merger - - the been straightforward when you are talking about that and then shown to be billions of dollars and with those consumers and they had declined to block the deal. >> antitrust enforcers we will find out about that because someone complains to them into investigate for example the treatment of the third-party marketplace sellers. and then they have to decide because the laws have been so narrowed legal precedent will turn to in those cases especially with religion so can we win in court? with that's

it is not just one law or a handful of laws, it is hundreds of laws that are amended and strengthened over time. >> can you speak about the laws that codified slavery here in virginia or anywhere? >> before we talk about the laws, there are a couple of cases that set precedent. one is in 1640 and it involves three men in servitude. one was an african man by the name of john punch, the other two were men of european descent, victor, a dutchman, and james gregory a scotsman. they were all in servitude, they ran from virginia to maryland, were caught and returned to virginia so they all committed the same crime. they were runaways, all together, did the same thing. you begin to see racial differences in treatment here with this case where victor and james gregory were made to serve their original owner one additional year in the colony of virginia for three years, john koch was made to serve his owners and his owners assigned wherever they live for the rest of his life. >> and he was black. >> he was black, he is referenced as african in this record. you have another case that turns out

it's law there. the discipline of the chamber is occupied with the cases of in charge stealing something from a supermarket or the judge that was called junk writing. so that's misinformation on the world you use information. number 2 is the european court of justice. i'm setting aside the trouble, i'm one of the european court of justice is entitle to deal with something that does not its competence, but those are good for the matter. did not suspend the discipline of the chamber. it was, it suspended the or put into the measures to be precise. all was just one small thing related to the question that was being asked, disciplinary action you ladies judges, you say that? yes it is. that it's an opinion, matricide not community. i'd like to highlight, it's also the public perception in your country that the independent a couple. i said, sorry, i don't think it's an area that you don't care about the public. you're not a democrat, i don't care. i don't care about a public perception because the public,

the law is the means to an end. to have it doesn't get you to where you want to go, you just ignore it. is called the carter page application. how many times do we have to see when it comes to liberals on the democratic machine, they look for an outcome, the law be. so he gave an affidavit to the trump campaign, send it to the fbi, the postal inspector looking at it now, i've got more information and now finding potentially that 25,000 nursing home residents in different nursing homes requested mail-in ballots at the exact same time. you can't ballot harvest in pennsylvania. what are the odds that 25,000 people in different locations of the same age group requested at the same time a ballot? somebody is up to no good in these nursing homes. we don't need their permission to look into these allegations. we owe it to those who voted for president trump and the country at large to test the system. we don't do a voting by mail in 2020, we will never win the white house again. the biggest difference between 2016 and 2020

no, it's in the basic law. they must obey hong kong law. when i said this, it is not clear yet what any new national security agency would be responsible for . it could simply be responsible for public education publicized here and promotion . you know, you cannot come to the conclusion that they are, they will be enforcing hong kong law. that's what they brit, that's what they do when they bring in their national security organs of the central police. government is a central people's government. that's what they are looking for. education is it, you don't know that again, you aren't me and you have no, no factual basis for making those sort of statements you are simply making. are sweeping allegations based on your own assumptions and bias when there's no assumptions and bias. when you look at how the national security organs of the central people's government operate when they're in on the mainland, and we're not talking about mainland, we're talking about one country 2 systems. let's come back to hong kong. it doesn't look as though it's

it's in the basic law. they must obey hong kong law that i said this, it is not clear yet what any new national security agency would be responsible for . it could simply be responsible for public education publicized here and promotion . you know, you cannot come to the conclusion that they are, they will be enforcing hong kong law. that's what they bring. that's what they do when they bring in their national security organs of the central police. government does a central people's government, that's what they are looking for. education is it, you don't know that again, you aren't, you and you have no, no factual basis for making those sort of statements. you are simply making our sweeping allegations based on your own assumptions and bias when there's no assumptions and bias when you look at how the national security organs of the central people's government operate when they're in on the mainland. we're not talking about mainland. we're talking about one country 2 systems. let's come back to hong kong. i

, i'll go back to the law -- every state has the same law.n observers are permitted to watch the whole process start to finish. that's a violation of law, how do you remedy that? >> just like the speaker said on this very show. you can't let those count. you need to get in and figure out which both they are. the good news is today, the speaker of the house and the president here in the state of pennsylvania -- >> sean: if you weren't allowed to watch it being open? you don't know what they did. >> that's the point. that's the point. those votes can't count. the speaker said that last night, and he's exactly right. >> sean: of real quickly, matt? >> a full audit is necessary, an injunction if necessary. i will fight on the floor of the house of representatives to stop the electoral college may be certified. we only need one senator to joined to make sure. >> sean: america needs a system where they can have honest, free, fair elections. we've been doing this 33 years, i've been on all sides of this, but they can have faith in, justin, confidenc

he teaches courses in federal law, indian law, comparative, and international indigenous people's law, constitutional law and legal history. he serves as the faculty director of the center for the study of american indian law and policy and the founding director of the international human rights law clinic. he was a recipient of the david l. born award. i should say, he was the first recipient, of the david l. born award for outstanding global engagement. he's an elected member of the american law constitute and the american bar foundation and serves as a justice on the supreme court of the cheyenne and the arapaho tribes. join me in welcoming lindsay robinson. [ applause ] >> it's a delight to be here. what didn't get mentioned is my dad's family is from charlottesville. my mom's family is in the tide water. and i went to law school and did my history droctorate at the university of virginia. i'm back home, in a sense. i'm been a proud oklahoman for 22 years and my kids identify as oklahomans. they don't really remember that when they were very young they lived in virginia. but my ol

law the title to their land. we call it restricted fee lands, and that's as a consequence of these removal treaty negotiations, to avoid having again to deal with the problem that they had to face in the 1830s. now, john marshall -- and this is an early 1830s portrait of john marshall, so he's older than you may be used to seeing him -- was appalled by all of this. marshall wrote to dabney carr, "humanity must bewail the course which is pursued." elsewhere in a letter, if memory serves to frelinghuysen, with whom he was in contact with during the removal debates, he described the effort of the southern states as something like the unholy combination of unrighteous power. and i have to say, i think that part of the reason he was so upset must have been that he felt partly to blame for it, because he's the one who had handed georgia the tool to independently start initiating the ouster of the cherokee nation by claiming rights as a landlord to impose its laws, and that provided incentive for the tribes to leave, et

-- else had a lawful choice? mr. hawkins: the poor and people of indian tribes, at any point they brought an as applied challenge, they would have been a talented -- entitled to prevail. from day one congress has been ordering them to do something which is beyond congress's commerce power. justice kagan: isn't that backwards to say those people who never had to pay a cent were subject to a command when people who did have to pay, who felt the coercive power of government were not subject to a command? mr. hawkins: that is part 3a of the chief justice's opinion indicating the mandate is best read as a command. to some people, many people, the construction was available at the time. in 2017, congress effectively eok these subsection exemptions and expanded them to everyone. there is no tax savings construction available and we are just left with a command. >> justice gorsuch. justice gorsuch: i would like to pick up on the merits. mr. hawkins, good morning. as i understand mr. verrilli, his argument on the merits is it

, federal critical law ethics, compliance and a whole lot more. my experience with sean has demonstrated that is not only in exceptional talented lawyer but someone deeply committed to the rule of law. he will be prepared to hit the day ground running on day one as a commissioner and i have complete confidence that he will faithfully apply the law fairly and neutrally. i will also note that sean and his wife ellen are expecting a baby this winter and so these are propitious times in the cooksey household and i'm proud to introduce my friend sean. >> thank you, senator cruz, ree nominees, two babies on the way into her the families. earlier this year our committee gathered to confirm a nominee t restore a quorum at the fec, since that confirmation of tray ainer the fec lost a quorum with the resignati of commissioner hunter in july of this year, the confirmation of thesehree nominees before the committee today will restore a quorum at the fec but more importantly the confirmation of these three nominees would restore a full slate of commissioners t

it's in our laws, you know, we have to apply the same laws to everybody under the common law system. no one is above the law. everyone is subject to the same set of laws and minister by the same system. i don't think they should. they should be any exception, just because they call themselves freedom fighters. i think they call themselves freedom fighters just trying to establish democracy, democratic rules that you didn't support the crackdown on the pro-democracy movement last summer. why last summer, what happened was not a crackdown on pro-democracy movement. the protests against a controversial piece of legislation turn soon turned violent. it became very filings. there were attacks on police headquarters, siege of universities pouring, setting innocent bystander on fire, killing a cleanup with a piece of break. it was very violent, but who in signs of this violence was, it wasn't really the demonstrators who incited this violence up the, the person was set on fire by one of the, the activists or one of the supporters of the activism activist movement. you know, no one is above

and it is not just one law or a handful of laws. it is hundreds of laws that are amended and strengthened over time. >> can you speak a little bit about the laws that codified slavery here in virginia? or anywhere? >> all right. well, before we talk about the laws, there are a couple of cases that kind of set precedent. one is in 1640. and it involves three men he who are in servetude. victor a did you haveman, and james gregory, a scotchman. so they ran from virginia to maryland. they were caught and returned to virginia. they all committed the same crime. they were runaways. they were caught together. they did the same thing. but you begin to see racial differences in treatment with this case where victor and james gregory were made to serve their original owner one additional year in the colony of virginia for three years. john ponch was played to serve his owner and his heirs for the rest of his natural life wherever they lived. >> and john punch was black. >> he was black. he is referenced as african in this record. but then yo

brouchard says if congress passes a law you will follow that law. but understand iing your job, a how you do it, is important. if you are doing someone else's job, no one is doing your job, which is critical. what standard, if you have had a chance to think about this, what standard has to be met to offer an investigation. let's just go in order here, what standard needs to be met before they open an investigation? >>. >> thank you there has to be a reason to believe that a violation could occur. and the reason i believe is based on sufficient evidence available. that is the standard that it is based in the statute and is also the regulations. >> yes, that is correct. it is the standard, i would scribe it as the presence of credible evidence that a violation of the law has occurred. >> senator i find myself in the position of agreeing with my fellow nominees. >> the fec is the subject of a great deal of litigation. the process requires someone to engage the commission. what is your view of that. all three lawyers, all three capable attorneys, what d

the affordable care act is not a perfect law. no law is. but i think it is families like dennis's where if the court invalidates some or all of the coverage dennis's would be severely disrupted and not something we should be prioritizing in a pandemic. host: go ahead. caller: is it possible that biden can use an executive order and give us insurance? can't the president do anything he wants to do? what hastop of that, the trump administration done byher legislatively or executive action to change the affordable care act at all? pass inf this comes to texas is successful striking down the affordable care act, there is nothing a trump administration or biting administration could do. it would be in the hands of congress which has a range of auctions. -- of options. congress could keep it out of the court entirely. there may be some very narrow circumstances were a biden administration could try to help. but at the end of the day, this would have to be something congress fixes. the idea that you could use an executive order to fill in the gaps

chief justice roberts: let's say congress passes a law saying everybody has to mow their law once a week and they even make a lot of findings about why that is a good thing. it makes the country look neater. you get fresh air if you have to do that. it supports the lawnmower business. but the fine for violating it is zero dollars. do they have standing? the neighbors will see they are not a bangle wall. the objectives of congress will not be fulfilled. re willr words, the certainly be injury to that person. i wonder if under your theory that person would not be able to challenge the law. general mongan: i do not think they would be on the theory they have altered their conduct to comply with the law and they suffered some injury. i think that follows from this that it is not enough to say i am injured by complying with the law. you have to show some real threat of enforcement. here of course, congress eliminated the only enforcement mechanism in 5000 a. chief justice roberts: thank you, general. justice thomas. mongan,thomas: general putting the chief justice's question in today's terms,

>> famous harvard law professor.ne of the rest no and highly regarded liberal law professors of his era. he had very good arguments. the good thing was he was so smart. there were certain amount of -- he was a fairly liberal law professor and it was not necessarily going to have a lot of sway with the conservative and in many cases he -- run into a real the supreme court does not allow video of its proceedings. but we have a clip. ted olson and lawrence drive, about a minute long, making their arguments. bush versus palm beach county canvassing authority. let's listen and have you talk about the arguments they made. -- laurence tribe. the novemberafter presidential election the florida supreme court overturned and materially rewrote portions of the carefully formulated set of laws enacted by florida's legislature to govern the conduct of that election. of who determination prevailed on november 7. part of ourit is culture to talk about how unfair it is to change the rules of the game, i think this is the point when t

no one is above the law. everyone is subject to the same set of laws and minister by the same system. i don't think they should. there should be any exception just because they call themselves freedom fighters, or they call themselves freedom fighters. just trying to establish democracy, democratic rules that you didn't support the crackdown on the pro-democracy movement last summer. why last summer, what happened was not a crackdown on pro-democracy movement. the protests against a controversial piece of legislation turn soon turned violent. it became very filings. there were attacks on police headquarters, siege of universities pouring, setting innocent bystander on fire, killing a cleaner with a piece of break. it was very violent, but who in signs of this violence was it, was it only to the demonstrators who incited this violence up the, the person was set on fire by one of the, the activists or one of those supporters of the activism activist movement. you know, no one is above the law, you know, they ar

. >> election law is complex. it is our job not to just and implement the law but do it in a way that is approachable. we don't write a lot. we can't change the law. that can only be done by your elected lawmakers. we are the referee. you have to follow the rules prescribed by those elect and we have in obligation to show you how we are doing that. to that end, i wanted to answer questions that we had been receiving in our office the last few days and updates. namely, let's discuss the unofficial turnout numbers, election day registration, and the mechanics of a recount. we have put out a press release with this information and encourage you to share the facts with others who may have questions or concerns about the election process. unofficially, wisconsin voters cast 3,929,374 votes for president. that is the most ever in the state of wisconsin, exceeding the previous record of 3,071,434 set in 2012. that makes the unofficial turnout percentage of wisconsin, which has a voting age population of 4,536,417 voters

parliament, richard the gluco from the law and justice party. and the polish government afford to be at odds with the e.u. and its core about race. are the good go welcome to conflict zone. good morning, great, good morning to you. my pleasure being here. the e.u. is said to be more than just a single market, but a union of values including rule of law, freedom of democracy, a respect for human rights. poland signed up to those values when it voted to join the bloc, back in 2004. but now you're willing to veto the budget over an accountability, mechanism. so you sign up to the values when you join the e.u., but you don't want to be accountable for breaching the well, that's exactly what you're sad. first of all, the church is illegitimate. so the use of low lito has been used or has appeared to be you just admitted it comes before there is nothing extraordinary in the fact that this or that plea government is not going to be happy with the solution that is. but i think that your e.u. partners would, would beg to differ on that mr. the good go. a

that is according to state law. and we follow state law. part of democracy is following the laws that have been prescribed by our elected lawmakers. and the elected lawmakers have prescribed the process for canvassing in our jurisdiction. i am incredibly proud of the work done by wisconsin's election officials. i feel 100% confident in the elections that they conducted. and that the laws that are established by elected lawmakers were followed in yesterday's election. calling election at the state level. that is called certification. and certification is a very meticulous, careful process that commences with the certification as a state first. up until that point, there is no statewide aggregate, there is no conceited election. any of those protections you are by the are predictions media and other groups, based on unofficial results. for many of us, we talked about the mechanics of how the process works. tois really important continue working hard to understand exactly how the process works and bring those mechanicals back to wisconsin vote

the rule of law has nothing to do with migration law which hungry has also broken.olling judges. also has to do with the fact that at his close circle relatives and friends have been seen to be enriching themselves through spending of eu funds, or that's what they are accused of. it's those types of things that eu leaders are standing against, and those two member states are trying to make them face up to. the reality is that evenif them face up to. the reality is that even if there were to be a compromise among the eu leaders themselves, the european parliament is very attached to a forcing poland and hungary to change these policies that are eroding rule of law standards. and so to clear the european parliament hurdle is going to be very difficult if this rule of law mechanism is watered down or even thrown out entirely. stay there matina. the second wave of coronavirus has hit hard on both sides of the atlantic. throughout the autumn cases soared in europe and the united states. this chart shows new confirmed cases per capita. but then in europe something happens

for following the law and not violating the law like their counties? if i were in the county, i would look at the law and the law said, you you can't cure a ballot. in the secretary says, it is ok to cure a ballot. as a good lawyer, i say to my client, the secretary doesn't mean anything. she can't very the law. it isn't some technical law like, is it three days or four days, it is can you fix the ballot? and it is invalid. that is the substance of the law. and i would tell my client, don't do it. goingt know what you're to accomplish by suing those two counties. they didn't do anything wrong. the counties that did something wrong are the counties that buried the law to make it easier to accumulate enormous numbers of illegal votes. they say we don't know how people voted. they do know that in philadelphia, the vote was for biden. it is ridiculous to say we don't know what would happen. it was equal over the entire state, what were they doing all over the state? the reality is this was a deliberate plan to do this. and to say that we didn't allege thes

joshua long might await a much harsher sentence under the national security law. if he had won this case, they would probably not have left him, let him off the hook. so i am pretty sure that all these conditions together made it look like a better option for him to do so. and what impact will this court case have on hong kong's trying to moccasin, if meant in this court case and its own is probably something that everybody would expect it already last year. what has a much wider impact on the protest movement is this national security law that introduces the arbitrary chinese judicial system into hong kong that provides for secrets trials and all these things. this is much more scary to the hong kong people and to the protest movement than these a court hearings and the sentences by the regular course under common law find it is failing us speaking to us from beijing, thank you. late is of the wealthiest countries have wrapped up an online summit, promising to supply covert 19 vaccines and testes affordably to all the world's, people. a virtual gathering of the g