this should not the a decision that he would want to -- not be a decision that he would want to make by himself because when america goes to war, when the president makes that decision, all america goes to war. we send our sons and daughters to fight for america, so with that decision, i don't understand why the president would want to make such a critical decision by himself. i think leaning on congress if there ever was a time, when you are contemplating sending american sons and daughters into war, that would be the time to lean on congress. let us do our job. host: walter, butler, indiana. caller: good morning. how are you. guest: i am good. how are you? caller: i am a happy man, you miss -- u.s. army veteran retired. guest: thank you for your service. caller: i had nothing else to do. they paid me to blow stuff done touch up. -- stuff up. guest: and for good cause. caller: i love my country and you turn on the boop tube, all of the presidents -- all of the republicans hate trump and the nice to haveit is a democrat take a measured response. one of the things about the iranian de

>> well, but that's a decision. if -- >> fair enough. >> if the court says, we're not getting involved, we're going to leave it to the legislature, the legislators will continue partisan gerrymandering. so not deciding is deciding. >> elizabeth, to you, why should every american care about the decision that's about to come down on this front, because it comes down to state legislatures, et cetera. >> i mean, it's a basic american principle that the voters choose their elected representatives and not the other way around and if the supreme court does not step in to say whether or not partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional, then they're really turning a blind eye to that because we know that it happens, it happens on both sides but as jeffrey said right now, definitely being used more by the republican party and as he said, if chief justice roberts and his court decide not to decide, that is really going to help the fate of the future republican party, as the demographics change. you know, this goes hand in hand

the decision. have your agencies decided not to provide the committee with certain documents? >> no, sir. >> can you commit to providing the committee with these documents? ares my colleague said, we in the process of pulling and reviewing documents. i cannot make a blanket commitments but we are committed to working with the committee. >> i understand that many inuments have gotten stuck an interagency group that has not decided to produce the documents. how long have those discussions been going on? what is taking so long and why has a decision not been made? spat in all, is there a the agency? >> i am not aware of any disagreement. it does definitely draw at the time it takes to be responsive when we have a lot of agencies to coordinate with. but i'm not aware of any disagreement. no, sir. >> you may go on. >> likewise, i'm not aware of any disagreements. our agencies are working together exceptionally well. we have great lines of communication as a part of this production. >> my last question.

do you decisions. one, 9-0.r gerrymandering would be -- >> sandra: that is not over yet. joining us from the white house. back.g us from the white house. the powerful va home loan benefit that lets us borrow up to 100 percent of our home's value, instead of just 80 percent like other loans. at newday usa, that can mean a lot more money, especially if your home has gone up in value. on average, our veterans take out 54,000 dollars. the newday 100 va loan lets you refinance your mortgage, consolidate your high rate credit card debt, get cash and lower your payments by over 600 dollars a month. so if you're a veteran and need money for your family, call newday usa. at newday usa veterans can buy a home with no down payment. at newday, your service is your down payment. "i got it!" so bookers are booking a one, two, three, that's a four day weekend "awesome" and with getaway deals on accommodation starting from 15 percent off, you can be a booker at booking dot com on accommodation starting from 15 percent off, is t

with this decision. i was at the table at the white house with a group of people, milita and intelligence was represented there, in a broad spectrum of political peoplefr congress were there. the president gave everybody an opportunity to express their opinions, to express their of the upside and downside of all the various options that were there on the table. he listened carefully. he didn't take one side or the other. he anguished over this and was very concerned about, obviously, the human aspects of this, what happens when kinetic action is used, but also with his duty toe nd america and present the front that america has to present when dealt with confntation from aligned forces. >> woodruff: ultimately, do you think he made the right decision? ell, look, i'm not going to go there. what i'm going to say is this is not a republican or a democrat decision. this is an american decision, and the person making -- only one person can make that decision.l that room was of people, very high-ranking people,

this is an american decision, and the person making -- only one persth can makat decision. that room was full of people, veryh-ranking people, but there was only one person in that room that could make the decision. we need to all pray for him as he makes those kinds ofon deci >> woodruff: what do you make, though, of the fact that it was at the last minute that the presidt asked about how many lives would be lost and then decided to pull back? >> you know, i think theen preswas very aware that there were lives lost. i think, when that decision -- when that advice was given to him, i think he was a little taken aback that it was going to be 150 people, and i know what he was thinking about was the proportionality of the response, shooting down an unarmed drone versus killing 150 people. i think, at that moment, that weight came to him, and that was a decision thaait, like i d, he had to make. again, i hope the iranians won't come away from this saying, oh, this guy is week. they're -- weak. they're dealing with donaldtr p and not another president and he is deeply committed

you have to make a bunch of decisions, do a bunch of plans for different systems. you'll interconnected, you need lots of money, it's not coming at the right time, so we called it time compression, disasters from the standpoint of urban development and normal you are bant development and management, the place of disaster becomes different from the normal place in that special way. and so really the challenge for disaster recovery management is to figure out how to manage that time compression, and we feel there are four levers for doing that. the first is, obviously, money. and when that money comes, how it comes, how it gets used and purpose is really important. the second is information. because what really is happening is just a tremendous amount of uncertainty that all of that simultaneous decision making, planning and acting requires, and so the more information that you can provide is kind of like another fuel for the process. and the third is basically collaboration. recovery is very different from response in that you response can be command and control, tr

. >> night two right behind both of us and how night one set the table for decision 2020, but it's decision day back home in washington, with two huge decisions set to come down any minute from the supreme court, both affecting your vote, your say, how people you elect that are supposed to be your void e. end up in august. here's the first one. a challenge to a proposed question on next year's census. the big survey every decade that counts who is who the the trump administration wants to ask about citizenship, but opponents say that could scare immigrants into not answering. why does it plate? if those communities are undercounted that could dramatically affect the number of seats in the house of representatives. >>> and another case a gerrymandering, or central question how much partisanship is too much? that's what the justs are looking at this morning right now. our team is here with the stories for the hour. >>> pete williams is over at the supreme court. pete, what do we know? we are potential minutes away. >> we're getting the first decision now. this is one of the lesser cases, an i

host: one of the justices in the minority in this decision, ruth bader ginsburg, wrote in her decision that by maintaining the peace process on a public highway, the commission elevates christianity over other faiths and religion over non-religion. memorializing the service of u.s. soldiers is an admirable and unfortunately secular objective, but the commission bys not serve that objective choosing a symbol that serves a starkly sectarian message. here is gary, indiana. caller: hello. i support that decision because let me tell you something, man. this crapnited uses that money is speech. they get away with it. why can't these people use the same thing to support their cause? the cross was a symbol of where christ died. i am not the most religious guy in the world, but i respect that. alito guy had a really good point in terms of what he said. the ones that got voted down, too bad for you, chumps. host: you support the decision. tell us why. caller: i do, indeed. i support the decision on a very specific reason. this cap clause is very specific -- the establishment clause is very speci

so you no one can agree with the decisions or disagree with those decisions. but it would be a mistake to say that tinker has been in effect overturned. there is no doubt that students enjoy a more robust rights than they did in 1960. tinker is the foundational role even though these exceptions exist, they still have a great ability to be a much greater ability than they did before tinker to be able to articulate themselves on the issues of the day. tinker should have gone farther still by the way. and the rule it comes from tinker is that educators have a reasonable fear of substantial disruption then it's permissible to sort of discipline the students for the speech.and that was a real leap forward but it can be understood as bating into the doctrine, something called a hecklers veto. where particular sensitive listeners can, if they object enough, succeed in shutting down other legitimate speech. they say hey, i don't like those armbands, i'm going to punch you in the nose. then that is a way of silencing that speech. and we see this dynamic play itself out

>> the fact that the decision on partisan gerrymandering was a partisan decision by 4, that makes it especially complicated. as partisanship and polarization is basically unleashed, that kind of self-interest, the fact it's a partisan decision makes it even, i think, more troubling for our democracy. >> the ripple effects begin immediately. thank you so much on this important day with this breaking news coming from the supreme court. there's also a lot more ahead. because remember, it is debate day again tonight and today in america. but first, the big takeaways from last night. the first democratic presidential debate. who shined? who stumbled? and which issues took center stage? plus, time is running out for congress to do something, to agree on something for a bill to address the deadly crisis playing out at the border and comes amid reports of brutal treatment at the facilities at the border. can congress reach a deal? dishwasher. hem ie so what does the dishwasher do? cascade platinum does the work for you, prewashing and removing stuck-on foods, the first time. wow, that's clea

republicanos en el congreso criticaron la decisiÓn de la corte. >> creo que cuando se encuentra genteata de establecer cuÁl la demografÍa, es una pregunta bÁsica cÓmo edad tienes ? >> , gÉnero o raza. el gobierno tiene la justificar en corte en la pregunta, pero se le acaba el tiempo. lo que estÁ poco claro es quÉ harÁ el gobierno que se habÍa un tweet puesto el plazo de este verano para empezar a incluir los formularios del censo que incluÍa la pregunta de la ciudadanÍa ? de la corte suprema, en washington, fernando pizarro univisiÓn. de acuerdo con expertos de la oficina del censo habrÍa ciertos impactos de inmediato en caso de incluirse la preguntada ciudadanÍa. entre ellos, reducirÍa nÚmero de allos, reducirÍa nÚmero de alrededor de 9 millones de personas no participarÍan si se incluye esta pregunta de ciudadanÍay favorecerÍa la actualizaciÓn de mapas polÍticos, entre otros aspectos. mientras tanto, la reacciÓn de lÍderes en california no se hizo esperar. un estado que liderÓ a otros en la corte por considerar la pregunta de ciudadanÍa como inconstitucional. maribel lÓpez nos tien

they took a decision later changed their mind well we've taken a decision in parliament we spent 40 years in the house of commons arguing about your all it's really from the day that we joined the european economic community in 1973 in the end we agreed on one thing which is that we couldn't agree so we all agreed nearly everybody overwhelmingly the house of commons voted to put the decision to the british people in a referendum i think from memory over 500 m.p.'s voted for that will thereabouts so the house of commons overwhelmingly said let's put it to the people and everybody promised faithfully to abide by the result now you could all he was sitting with a thought that because both sides thought they were going to win but anyway everybody promised and the decision was to leave and yet many people in the house of commons never accepted it felt it was the wrong answer felt the people had made a dreadful mistake and they spent the last 3 years digging that he was doing everything they can to frustrate the will of the people this as i said as you quoted me this is more from lead this is r

essenceroberts said in that normally, courts will defer to a decision by an administrative agency, as long as it is reasonable. there is a wide latitude we will give you, but in this case, it really seems like the decision to include a question about ofizenship, the explanation the department of commerce gave was a pretext. they said they wanted the data of citizenship to better enforce federal voting rights laws and that the department of justice had requested it, but when you look at the evidence in the case, it looks like the department of commerce started talking about including the question on the census pretty much immediately after the inauguration and effectively went out shopping for someone who would ask it for the data, so that they would have a reason to use the question. >> that is a complex opinion. other justices also wrote, concurring in part. amy: some of the justices would have deferred altogether to the agency's decision, just as stephen breyer would have not deferred to the agency at all. so they are all over the map. but five justices were able to come together an

and let's just we can make those decisions. and let'sjust remember, we can make those decisions.member, less than 10% of uk businesses export to the european union. the business that i run at the moment is a uk—based business, but i run a £1 billion multinational stock market listed company. i tripled the share price infour company. i tripled the share price in four years. so i know how this sort of stuff works. so basically you won't be affected.” sort of stuff works. so basically you won't be affected. i won't be affected at all. great, so you can ta ke affected at all. great, so you can take the risk with everyone else's business. but remember, that's 90% of business. but remember, that's 9096 of the uk business community. why should they be burdened with the rules and regulations determined in brussels that affect their day—to—day lives? they shouldn't be. and let's remember, yes, of course, if you export to a different country, you abide by their rules and regulations. why should our own domestic businesses that are only operating to mystically, why should we suffer that inc

those decisions are hours.any women and look at our maternal mortality rate in this country, they are the highest of any industrialized country in the world. if you are a black woman, you are four times more likely to die in childbirth because of institutional racism in our health care system. when you are telling a woman that she does not get to make those decisions, it's a life or death decision for her. it should be her human right. [applause] >> thank you, senator. i want to introduce a member of our audience. she is a reproductive activist, dulla, writer and parent. she is part of the organization that provides direct funding and practical help for abortion funding. let's hear from her. [applause] >> first i want to thank you for all of your years of dedication to abortion access. i have met you like once before but kind of in passing at the capital. that's neither here nor there. i'm just here to say that anti-choice activists for years have told anyone who will listen that laws and abortion bans protect

the result of the decision was predictable. the implementation for the photo id law the state has been forbidden from implementing under section five even more alarming voter suppression has metastasized in the years since the decision replaces mike wisconsin, north dakota and jurisdiction in kansas we've provided copies of the report for each member of the committee. the documentation and examination of the plethora of the discriminatory voting changes proposed or implemented since shelby are annual election day voter protection work and our own experience getting the cases, challenging voter suppression schemes enabled them to stay unequivocally that there is a critical and urgent need for congress to act to restore and strengthen the full protection of the voting rights act. the mechanism stop the discrimination before the harm occurred. it authorizes us to challenge it is not enough. the release comes too late and at a greater cost and burden from hundreds of thousands of voters, millions. one dramatically illustrates this.

iran then has a decision to make. they are pushing this up to the line where they think they can just come shy of a response and not cross over to that. people arguing that iran wants to us to act don't know what they are talking about. they don't want us to attack. they do want to appear they are equal to the president and pressure us sbointo this deal. >> the president campaigned on keeping the united states out of wars. was he keeping his promise to avoid a new war? >> i don't know. again, i don't begrudge the president's final decision but he also did pledge to protect the united states of america. we can argue about what does that include. that has to be a forward leaning defensive posture of american troop, american assets and american allies. he's got some people in his ear. i don't know if he's listening to them that. it's a straw men. there's all kinds of different escalating things you can do to keep it both small. your prior guest last hour talking about operation desert fox that president clinton did. ther

he defends a party decision.e deal with anti—semitism very seriously, there is no place for it in our society and obviously not in our party as well. the delivery firm huber eats tightens up its ways restau ra nts huber eats tightens up its ways restaurants join the platform after bbc set up a fake take away. the last two minutes, lionesses become first senior england team to reach semifinal by beating norway three, zero at the women's world cup. good evening, coming up in ten minutes a full bulletin of the basin is that sophie, the first to compare this to be the expert minister boris johnson and jeremy hunt had been facing questions from our conservative party members, this time in barnett. he reiterated his pledge to be added the eu by october the 31st. we can come out and october 31, we must come out and we will. and the way we do, is a good way of getting a great deal, you seek out the problem of the northern irish backstop outside at the current withdrawal agreement, you disaggregate the elements of that 11

able to make decisions quickly. decisions can cost hundreds of millions of dollars on a project like this. is important to move forward as quickly as possible. and then the roles and responsibilities, as i mentioned , all these different stakeholders, they have a role in the future and the operations and maintenance of the system. you have to define what those roles are, what are the boundaries for maintenance of the system, where the boundaries for operation, but also bring them back into design and construction and what are the roles and responsibilities. it is important to define that upfront so there's no confusion. we found as we were asking questions when we were here back in march that for us, it was a little confusing what the roles and responsibilities of all the parties were for phase one, and so we think that has to be very clearly established so everybody knows what the roles are, and what their lane is, for any project, it is helpful to have a champion. somebody who is known in this city, someone who ca

>> well, i can tell you about his decision about iran, he had enormous confidence about his decisionse and this is what i am still not fully, you just talk to him. he was cautious the whole day about this. i think that's where i think is interesting as we continue to learn more of activities at the pentagon and state department and activities in the national security council because he seems to look at it okay give me my options but he seems to have a lot of comfort in the decision that he made. he seems to have a lot of confidence. he thinks, he thinks the entire motivation of shooting down that drone was not to provoke a response. he still believes there is -- he says no preconditions and he'll sit down either one. so that's what he wants out of this it seems is to talk. we'll see. the iranians have not given that indications yet. that's for sure. >> the iranians have been reaching out but blocked communications with anybody in the senior trump leadership so there is back channel into the media as if they gotten nowhere. it is very difficult no iranians for them to do anything over

but ultimately, he is the one who makes the decision.eing president, commander-in-chief is all about. >> exactly. he is the commander-in-chief it's his decision. i think it shows he does not take that job lately. he makes a measured call and exactly right, very transparent about it. he left the american people know exactly why he made the decision he made. but absolutely he's got a great team around him as well. the president has been so tough on iran, we pull out of a terrible nuclear deal which put them on a pathway to nuclear weapons. and i love our chairwoman what she said about the media coverage. but i guess the media did not have to beg them to give obama the peace prize because he got it on day one. before he sent cash to iran. david: no joe biden. he's had a terrible week, alex. i'm wondering, the establishment is trying desperately, the old democratic party establishment, to get them to lay off of joe biden, not call him a racist or suggest he has said anything wrong. i don't think they are succeeding very well at it. do you? >

do you think robert mueller failed to do his duty in making a decision? >> that is my opinion. >> okay. with that i yield back, mr. chairman. >> gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. >> thank you, mr. chairman. before continuing, i would just ask the witnesses to direct their attention to what's referred to as slide seven. it's a timeline. it goes from june 14, 2017, with an nbc news story saying trump being investigated for possible obstruction of justice and then it goes through various tweets from the president, including on june 15, you are witnessing the single greatest witch hunt in american political history led by some very bad and conflicted people to a june 17 story of trump directing mcgahn to fire the special counsel. on june 19, trump dictates to former campaign manager, deliver a message to the attorney general, directing him to not investigate trump, concluding on the 6th of december with -- shield the president from the ongoing russia investigation and just going back, professor mcquaid, to the questioning, how do you inter

take us through their decision making and the opinions on each side. >> reporter: the census decisions a setback for the trump administration but it isn't over yet. what the chief justice and the four that voted would him, the liberal side said is the reason the justification that the commerce secretary gave for wanting to add this question to the sensicensus form is a prete it's not the truth. the commerce secretary said he added the question after getting a request from the justice department that said it wanted the data. that can't be true the supreme court said. it's clear from the evidence that the commerce department, the commerce secretary started thinking about this way before. so what the court did is sent the case back to the district court in new york, which ruled against the government. that court in turn had sent it back to the census department. census bureau. what the supreme court has done today is, okay, the reason you've given us so far, that doesn't wash. you have the opportunity to try again. the question is, if the census bureau comes up with some other reason for

since i make the decisions that took to continue to grow on licenses those decisions are unlawful and they have to go back and reconsider looking in taking into account and the key question of whether they can say it's breached by a child rules well some estimates put direct deaths in the war in yemen close to 100000 people since the start of the conflict and haul off of the 20000000 people in yemen said to be in food insecurity and that war has caused the worst cholera outbreak in modern history let's have a look now at the war in yemen and the causes and how it some found it. first secretary of state for international trade the in focus has been addressing the colemans on thursday in the wake of that decision by the pool to appeal he says that they will appeal that judgment again today saying that the judgment was not about whether that decision themselves to sell those arms was right or wrong but whether the process in reaching that decision was correct indeed liam fox went on to say that the u.k. government continues to apply rigorous process and decision making when it comes to s

this is a decision the u.s. government has used for our company that we are not going to allow this technology to come in because of the concerns beverly cit cited. john bolton has been critical of the decision to allow huawei to build noncore aspects of 5g. it was a controversial decision in the uk, led to the resignation of the defense secretary who has been accused of leaking cabinet discussions over this decision. and i think this is absolutely something that is going to be on the president's agenda because of those intelligence concerns. >> from richard in pennsylvania. republican line, go ahead. >> yes, nice to have your guest on. i appreciate the description of or the comments as to why the british people got into brexit in the first place, would you say that the two primary drivers for the referendum had to do with the contributions that great britain and all you nations are required to pay. and also the free movement of people and my second comment is you mentioned how the people in the uk on the left p

i think she came to a reasoned decision. >> she came to only decision she could come to. mcconnell was not going to basically roll over. his bill, senate bill or nothing, and the bottom line is these democrats are out there yelling and screaming about the administration poisoning kids and not taking care of kids -- lou: well, let's not get carried away. >> that's what they're saying. they couldn't do that. my sense is she did the only thing she could do. aoc is a freshman member who's been there for six months and created a lot of chaos. lou: ed rollins, as always, thank you very much. >> thank you, sir. lou: socialism on full display at the radical dems' debate. >> make community college free -- >> take that corporate tax rate up to 28% -- >> we're supposed to be for a 70% tax rate on the wealthy. yes, we're supposed to be for free college. >> we should give everyone in this country health care as a basic right for free. >> medicare for all -- >> medicare for all. >> universal health care. >> $15 minimum wage, pre-k for all. lou: wow. amazing to watch, amazing to hear. t

successive decisions of the u.s. supreme court have made this the functional equivalent of article 8 of the european convention on human rights and fundamental freedoms. which protects private life. both provisions have been interpreted as potentially embracing any interference with the personal autonomy of individuals within limits. but within what limits? all interfere with the personal autonomy of individuals. that is what they're there for. if the limits to the right of liberty are to be fixed as a matter of principle, by judges, then the answer must necessarily depend upon a judgment about which interferences with personal autonomy are acceptable and which are not. half a century ago, this problem was energetically debated in the u.s. supreme court in a celebrated case about a connecticut statute forbidding contraception. the court held by a majority that there was a constitutional right of privacy, which the connecticut statute violated. but this right was nowhere mentioned in the constitution, and confusion ab

to the people, and they would carry out this decision, and it was a once in a generation decision.y are trying to say no, it is parliament's decision. we're not going to leave without a no deal. let'sjust remember, parliament voted twice, when it agreed to serve article 50, with or without a deal. this was the triggering process. this was the process of triggering it. they it enacted the bill last summer, what was called the european withdrawal act. again, it voted to leave on 29 march without a deal. so why have mps suddenly bottled it, wimped out and said it is all a bit too scary? why didn't they get ready, why didn't they prepare, so actually we could leave on 29 march? in the words of your leader writing back in april in a british newspaper, they arrogantly stuck two fingers up to their own manifestos, lied to the electorate, and done everything possible to thwart the result. the sheer scale of their betrayal of the country is difficult to grasp in the light of this. the best option open to brexiteers is to punish both establishment parties, which is what happened in european

, but whether the decision—making process was rational. judgment emphasizes that there would not be only one answer on future risk, if historic violations were found to have taken place. in other words, changing the process set out by the court does not necessarily mean any of the decisions would be different. we are supposed to be the guardians of international humanitarian law. not the people found in breach of it. the court of appeal's ruling today is a damning indictment of this government's handling of export licenses to the kingdom of saudi arabia. finding that they did not lawfully do so will stop indeed, the court found, and i quote, "the government made no concluded assessments of whether the saudi led coalition had committed violations of international humanitarian law in the past, during the yemen conflict, and made no attempt to do so". the secretary of state has tried to excuse himself by pleading that thisjudgment is not about whether the government has made the right or wrong decision, but whether the decision—making process

, a second decision, really, on roe v.nd you're exactly right about that, erica. if you look at different states, you will see that different approaches are being used. obviously in missouri they're talking about the need for a second pelvic exam. in other states, there are other procedures, we've heard about fetal heartbeat laws being used. there are a number of approaches being used to give the supreme court a reason to take a second look at roe v. wade. >> we'll continue to follow all of them. paul, thank you, we appreciate it. >>> ahead, democrats reaching out to voters in critical states, their messages before the debate, coming up. >>> first, there are more than 30 million stray or feral cats living in the u.s. we'll talk to someone who has made it his mission to bring those populations down. >> my main focus is grabbing cats off the streets, saving lives. with tnr, this is the last generation that has to suffer outside. now i've probably fixed and returned at least a thousand feral cats in about 4 1/2 years. a lot o

but whether the decision—making process was rational.ric violations were found to have taken place. in other words, changing the process, as set out by the court, does not necessarily mean any of the decisions would be different. we are supposed to be the guardians of international humanitarian law, not that people found in breach of it. the court of appeal's ruling today is a damning indictment of this government's handling of export licences to the kingdom of saudi arabia. the secretary of state has tried to excuse himself by pleading that this judgement is not about whether the government has made the right a wrong decision, but whether the decision—making process was rational. surely even he must understand that if the decision process was not rational, then the government could have no confidence that it was correct. barry gardiner. now, what happens when a commons committee produces a report, and the government ignores it? the environmental audit committee has called for action to put a stop to throwaway clothes and poor working co

congress said this was the correct decision but at the same time they cautioned against any escalation the president may not intend to go to war here but we're worried that he and the administration may bumble into a war mark kimmitt who was assistant secretary of state under george w. bush said trump is not unpredictable but rather sticks to a consistent strategy to avoid a new war in the middle east and really i think he made the right decision there united states has been accused in the past to being a cowboy to overreacting to the situation particularly in the middle east and i think that particularly with the advice given by his counselors and by congress he actually is showing a policy of restraint i think he recognizes that iran is not going anywhere it will be there tomorrow if he wants to attack. the president himself has said he's not in a rush but trump still faces a dilemma if he doesn't react to iranian provocations like the drones being shot down his threats might not be taken seriously and if he does start a war he risks breaking his campaign promise of keeping the u.s.

two major decision, jerry man gerrymandering combined. what was the ruling on that one? >> we had two different cases involving partisan gerrymandering. one out of maryland. another one out of north carolina. they ruled that partisan gerrymandering is something that courts should not get involved in. it's what they call a political question. something that should be left to congress and the political proce process. the problem with political gerrymandering is that everybody has long known and accepted that when you've got state legislatures who are drawing maps, of course they will consider politics and the problem with political gerrymandering is how do you decide when a districting map has gone too far when you've considered politics too much. we've never been able to come up with a workable standard to figure out when a map crosses a line from being a permissible use of politics to an unconstitutional use of politics. we're not going to try, in essence. some states have set up in an effort to take the politics out of redistricting but courts aren't going to get involv

there's one big decision on both sides. so -- >> the fact that the right -- >> the reaction to roberts on the census point has been so fierce from conservatives. there's a movement to impeach the chiefs justice because of what he did. i think that won't go very far, but people really -- the conservatives really are angry at roberts for not being a -- towing the line. >> it does seem like there's a feeling if you're on our team, you can't ever variy. we saw the debate on the press in the last few months where people were saying legitimacy is at stake. and conservatives are saying that's crazy. that's just vote your conscience. you wouldn't be worried about this legitimacy concept. it's made up by liberals. >> it seems if there's going to be an impact, and i -- from a kind of hostility toward this or this impeachment movement, imagine the impact would be what the speakers would want. i just cannot imagine that affecting the chief justice. so -- you know, for political reasons or whatever, but again, i think we get back to tha

decision on this very critical matter.bill mcgurn and kyle peterson. so dan what do you make of this term? are you happy with the new court? >> i think we should be happy with the new court. obviously justice neal gorsuch is aligning himself with justice thomas. i especially like justice gorsuch line when he says that they law is no law. you just cannot write a gloss and dump them off in the bureaucracy and expect that to stand. he intends to put more pressure back on the writers of legislation. i think there probably is a majority on this court to go in that direction. unfortunately some of the decisions this year probably made the situation worse and we will talk about that. paul: the citizenship question case is for some of us. frustrating because never before as i've looked at the case and some of my legal advisers say the court looks so deeply into overruling an agency decision that in itself is clearly lawful. the commerce secretary has the power under congress original statute to put the citizens question and by the

don't about for the government has made the right or wrong decisions about granting export licenses but concerns the rationality of the process used to reach decisions as i said earlier we disagree with the judgment and the secret mission to appeal this judgment won't immediately stop the holds the export of sales to saudi arabia but it is a landmark case and for a fact it's a big day and a big result and they say that they will continue the fight to stop any further arms sales to saudi arabia. u.s. government documents have raised questions about the f.b.i.'s conclusion that russia was behind an alleged attack of the democratic party service in 2016 the n.c.a. never received a final report from private cyber security company crowd strike which is hype hearty. investigate hack the report with the core evidence of the rush in the hacking investigation with more on the story his word cast it. faith is a remarkable thing it can move mountains if you believe something hard enough heart and soul it doesn't actually matter if it's real it ought faith in god in family or in russian hackers

he made a decision about collusion, he couldn't make a decision about obstruction. think he should return the money. if somebody appointed me as an investigator and i investigate and say i can't figure out the second one. they pay me $35 mill. i think we have to give $17 million back. judge jeanine: i think you should be able to get that money back because there is no reason for him to not make a decision. >> i think mueller has made a complete fool out of himself. not more than comey -- imagine saying the report speaks for itself then speaking for nine minute and not saying anything except little hints to the fawning democrats who want some excuse to impeach, even though the president didn't do anything wrong. judge jeanine: what he did in the end. after the report came out he left the crumbs by not deciding on obstruction. but i want to go to a sound of actually bill barr talking about treason. this is not -- this is just a statement that he said. barr says the president has tweeted and said publicly that in some upper echelon comey and mccabe committed treason. t

it really was her decision in the end i think she's just taken this decision into her own hands and she said herself in a statement which she published earlier today that she wanted to ensure they ensure that it was a very orderly hand over because of course we have 2 very important positions here one that's the parliamentary group leader of the social democrats who takes care of things in the bundestag in parliament for that parliamentary group and also the party leaders are 2 very significant positions and that will really who actually replaces her now in those 2 different positions will really have a huge effect on how the social democrats move forward and if they have any chance at all of pushing through this revitalization of the party which they've been trying so desperately to do since those last election the last national elections here in germany but have so far failed to do so that's a big call for anybody who now has to feel under analysis shoes what does this mean for the social democrats we've seen in progressive lee losing losing losing and then as you say culminating