the federal election commission determined there was no campaign violation. the department of justice agreed, no civil fine or criminal charge rendered. those two entities have exclusive authority over federal elections. the state has no authority and the city has no authority and he never wanted to bring this case. not a local prosecutor such as alvin bragg should be involved. and the judge as you know is totally kicked and everybody is talked about it. it is an embarrassment to the new york legal analysts. cnn doesn't think the prosecution has proven us case. senator john kennedy respected gentleman says more about politics than justice. bringing in a fellow criminal trial it has proved to be a felony. there feels to crime. everybody is saying there is no crime. but i have been here almost four weeks in an icebox. they call it the icebox listening to a judge who is totally corrupted and conflicted. highly respected lawyer hush money is not a crime. by the way, congress everybody in congress the n.d.a.'s are very common, unanimous disclosure agreements. they

we're really excited about it. >> before this job or at least in your resumÉ you were at the federal trade commissioncalled chief technologist what was that? >> federal trade commission is the general consumer protection, and one of the competition agents in the united states and the chief technologist job is to bring understanding of technology to that policy space and so, i've spent a lot of time look at reports. but also cases, and investigations that the ftc was diagnose to bring that lens of technical expertise into the policy work that the federal trade commission was doing. >> right before we go into the topic at hand abundance institute how was it funded and financially supported? >> so a wide range of foundation individual, and corporate donors we're new so some of that is still being figured out. but you know we just launched in april but that's sort of the space that we live in. >> if i asked does a.i. money come from the community? >> i'm not 100% sure on what companies but i think that a lot of a.i. communities certain parts of it would be interested in what we're doing. yes. >> so when

>> the federal trade commission is the general consumer protection and what of the competition agencies in the united states but the chief technologist job is to bring understanding of technology to that policy space. i spent a lot of time looking at reports but also cases and investigations that the ftc was doing to bring that lens of technical expertise into the policy work that the federal trade commission was doing. >> before we go into the topic at hand, how is it funded and financially supported? >> the abundant institute has a wide range of foundation and corporate donors. we are very new. some of that is still being figured out. we just launched in april. that is the space that we live in. >> does that come from the community? >> i am not sure of all the details with what companies. a lot of the a.i. communities would be very interested in what we are doing. >> when it comes to the topic of the elections, your institute put out a series of reports forthcoming about the election. what is the concern over all or at least the things you are concerned about these reports? >> almost

growth and personal growth. >> host: before this job released in your resume you at the federal traden commission, position, chief technologist. what was that? how does it inform what to do now? >> guest: the federal trade commission is that the general consumer protection, and one of the competition agencies in thei united states. chief technologist jobs to bring anderson of technology to the policy space. i spent a lot of time looking at reports but also cases and investigations that the ftc was doing to bringng that lens of technical expertise into the policy worked of the federalas trade commission was the. >> host: if over go to topic at hand, the london abun, how is it funded? >> guest: it has a wide range of foundation, individual and corporate dono. we are very news actually some of that is still being figured out but we just launched in april but that's sort of the space within the. >> host: does money come from the ai community? >> guest: on the back to 100% sure on all the details of what companies but i think that a lot of the ai communities would be interested in doing what we're doi

the federal election commission determined there was no campaign finance violation. the department of justice agreed. those two entities have exclusive authority over federal elections. the state has absolutely no authority and the city, bragg, has no authority. bragg never wanted to bring this case. no prosecutor such as alvin bragg should be involved in this case. the judge is totally conflicted and everybody is talking about it. an embarrassment to new york. legal analyst michael moore, cnn doesn't think the prosecution has proven its case. senator john kennedy respected gentleman, the trial says more about politics than an alleged crime. if you want to hide something from bragg you put it in the law books. it hasn't proved to be a felony. there was no crime. everybody is saying there is no crime. but i've been here for almost four weeks in an ice box. i call it the ice box listening to a judge who is totally corrupt and conflicted. highly respected lawyer, hush money is not a crime. signing an nda is not a crime. by the way, everybody in congress have ndas. they'r

federal campaign contribution. >> there's absolutely no problem. >> there's no problem with, you know, the mtc itself mpc the elections commission, federal elections commission, they lifted this years ago and they took a fast. they said there's no problem here tim scott objective is to keep dropped off the campaign trail as all they tried to do, keep him off the campaign trail. here's the new york times. it just came out with so while ago where we're leaving in every state and every the five q stakes relieving very substantially. i might add. >> so it's all believers said day for the country and said from new york, i mean new york, that a judge is highly conflicted at a level that nobody has seen before for can possibly think of it. and you should go out and check it out but we have a corrupt and we have a judge is highly i can and he's keeping me from campaigning. hizon appointed new york judge, appointed you know appointed him but read politicians he's appointed is a corrupt judge and is conflicted. the judge and he only let us go out and campaign and get rid of this every single legal atlas even cnn even msdnc, the same there's no case here tha

the federal election commission determined there was no campaign violation. the department of justice agreed, no civil fine or criminal charge rendered. those two entities have exclusive authority over federal elections. the state has no authority and the city has no authority and he never wanted to bring this case. not a local prosecutor such as alvin bragg should be involved. and the judge as you know is totally kicked and everybody is talked about it. it is an embarrassment to the new york legal analysts. cnn doesn't think the prosecution has proven us case. senator john kennedy respected gentleman says more about politics than justice. bringing in a fellow criminal trial it has proved to be a felony. there feels to crime. everybody is saying there is no crime. but i have been here almost four weeks in an icebox. they call it the icebox listening to a judge who is totally corrupted and conflicted. highly respected lawyer hush money is not a crime. by the way, congress everybody in congress the n.d.a.'s are very common, unanimous disclosure agreements. they

and the form of a regulatory agency, the federal communications commission, federal communications commission in those days viewed itself as protector. at&t monopoly and assuring that there was no competition to national networks, particularly cable. so what what happened was the nixon administration and as chris called it a revolution. yes. a revolution resulted. and it was a revolution that was based the notion that rather than a nationalized telecom system, heavily regulated, that there was more of a role for enterprise and more of a for competition. this revolution, the early 1970s, planted the seeds for the telecom indications industry that we have today. yes, i was saying there is a direct cause of the line between the nixon administration's telecom and the incredible telecom indications that we have today with, well, more choice than consumers can handle and more equipment than we can afford. and. what is it relayed? how did this happen? well, happened with the nixon administration, the presidents choice of tom had a visionary to lead. and this made all the difference in the world. tom

to raise those dead misdemeanors and ride to direct them if they're a violation of the federal election commissionct, or if there violation of federal tax law, neither of which they have any jurisdiction in the fact that you have to have a unanimous verdict, unanimous jury on any of the terms that's a violation of the sixth amendment and the seventh amendment. and the fact that in this particular case, the judge has allowed in michael cohen and david parker to be able to talk about the fact that they have been implicated not michael cohen specifically pleaded guilty to a camping violation and also david tucker working out a deal with the prosecutor and then magic with the jury you know what michael: was aiding and abetting for a federal election commission violations. and the first missing witness charge should have been granted against alan weiss of burke who was in the control of the prosecution who had relevant material evidence. and lastly there is no proof of guilt here. no one is testified that donald trump had anything to do with the invoice the vouchers or the checks all we know is that he

we had the best expert most respected expert, head of the federal elections commission. he was all set to testify. he was waiting for two days. and when it was his turn, bragg's people protested and the judge knocked him out said you can't testify. he actually said you can't testify for anything having to do with the trial. you can say what the federal elections is. well, that doesn't help. everybody knows that. but you can't testify. so essentially he wasn't able to

this is a document that was agreed to by the federal election commission and the department of justicemorandum of understanding on april 19, 2023 and the you see official record. the under same to the federal election commission and the united states department of justice to promote the enforcement of the federal campaign finance laws. the mou establishes guidelines for the commission and d.o.j. to engage in parallel proceedings sharing information and circumstances and otherwise properly been submissions of both agencies and subject to all relevant legal and ethical constraints an informed by the mutual respect and goes on. the department of justice has exclusive jurisdiction on criminal enforcement of the federal campaign finance laws including related criminal offenses. there it is. judge merchan you moan to copy this but on the other hand you might not give in who you are and what you are doing. this basically is an agreement on what we already knew. this is a federal jurisdiction is called federal campaign laws. note state prosecutor and no state judge is free to just pretend that

i was reading your commentary, other commentaries, this fellow brad smith from the federal election commission who was not allowed to testify yesterday or today for that matter, telling columnist byron york and others that the charges against trump would never have been with held by the federal election commission. he didn't commit a crime. personal matters. none of this would have amounted to a crime. they wouldn't let him testify. my question, costello, mike cohen's former lawyer, he testified and ripped cohen to pieces. is the judge trying to rule out what these people are saying, particularly costello, but even with the federal election commission, brad smith who said this is not a crime, is that what the judge is doing? >> well, he has effectively blocked obviously smith from testifying by saying he could only testify to issues that really are not central to the allegations against trump. what smith was saying is what many of us has said, which there was no federal election offense here. the department of justice looked at this, decided not to bring charges. the federal election commissio

the prosecution hasn't actually shown how trump violated federal election commission law. they have been sneaking it in by saying cohen violated it and pecker might have violated it. that's not what is on trial here. what's on trial did donald trump violate federal election law? you haven't seen the prosecution put that on yet. so it's weird to me actually to see judge merchan letting stormy daniels testify at will all over the place on things that are not actually relevant to the trial and then he is all over brad smith. not just a worker. brad smith is a distinguished constitutional law expert and one of the top scholars on the federal election law. one of the first people identified all the problems with the federal election law. this is the perfect guy. i would think if a judge would be defer -- let someone testify is brad smith. >> bill: i was watching lanny davis talking about the payments and how they were partitioned over a period of 12 payments. he was suggesting that that was evidence that trump knew that the maximum contribution is $2700 under law and therefore h

even if the taxes were paid in full the federal elections commission concluded the money paid did not constitute a campaign contribution under the law. remember, this judge wouldn't allow it. he is a very conflicted judge. you don't want to cover about what the conflict was, i'm not allowed to talk about it because of a gag order. what stuff does he really not want to talk about? there was no fraud, no conspiracy. without a primary crime there can be no secondary crime. weaponizing statutes. no law has been broken. that was gregg jarrett. another legal analyst for cnn. the crime is not easy to explain or to understand. it is just not understandable. in other words, there is no crime. this is cnn. kathryn christian from msnbc, legal analyst. it is difficult because it is a very nuanced argument. it has never been prosecuted before. this is an argument that has never been prosecuted before. hopefully it will never be prosecuted again. andy mccarthy, this is anything but standard. it is the opposite of standard. the idea they don't have to agree on what the other crime is. we spent six w

years of delays on our ability to do this, and so we had to bring a number of appeals in the federal commission. ah we were successful in those appeals, and there was a decision recently that basically held the pg and e could not use its monopoly to unfairly delay or add tens of millions of dollars of cost. to the city and county of san francisco, as we are trying to move forward with our vision of public power. clearly pgd has not been able to serve not just san francisco but northern california. well we all know that with the wildfires with its bankruptcies, with all the issues that they've had, we think there is a different model to move forward on and we are grateful to the court. and providing a ruling that allows us to move forward. well thank you so much for coming on the show. i really appreciate the time you've given us here today. i appreciate and thanks for your thanks for your questions. thank you. well that's it. for this episode, we'll be back with another one shortly for sf gov t v. i'm chris manners. thanks for watching. yeah. [meeting adjourned]. >> good afternoon, everyone and

the federal commission has said that it would give official results on sunday, but that isn't confirmed until all the results like in collated and audited. remember, the commission does have up to 7 days off the voting day to display those results and the results you see coming in now they saw at about 2 or 3 hours off to some of the posting stations close. so ultimately the commission is on track despite that late such and voting a wednesday evening. all right, to estimate them in a life as the result suppression center in midland in. so that's got to be the frontier they were on those up and the registration period for its upcoming presidential election. the countries trying to replace late president abraham and i you see who was killed in a helicopter crash earlier this month. but during the next 5 days, it radians can apply to run for president. candidates must comply with certain criteria such as age education. but it just police and previous government experience. candidates will then be evaluated by the 12 member government body known as the guardian council, half of whom are dir

so the district turned it down, washington turned it down, the federal election commission turned it down and do you who else turned it down? everybody turn it down. and then brag came in and he turned it down. he got very angry actually because they came out and what is happening are the pavers looking into that deal? but he got himself into a jam. so what happened is brag turned it down. and then when the election comes along he says well, remember this. it's a federal case. they turned it down and he is bringing it into the state or the city i guess. work violent crime is all over the place, the city is going to hell and many prosecutors i couldn't even count them looked at me like that, certainly they have had more than 20 prosecutors sitting there over the fact somebody paid a lawyer and in paying the lawyer, so it was a legal expense, that somebody happened to be me, i didn't do the bookkeeping i didn't know about it but a very good bookkeeper marked a legal expense down as a legal expense. they didn't call it construction, they didn't call it building something or electrical c

smith is an election law expert and former chairman of the federal election commission expected to testify the payments to stormy daniels don't count as campaign contributions as the prosecutors have alleged but are personal expenses. smith has already compared trump's case to the 2012 prosecution of former north carolina senator john edwards. you may remember he faced charges that he misused campaign funds to try to find an affair with his mistress. that exploded during the 2008 presidential campaign. despite all that, edwards' trial ended in an acquittal and a mistrial. see what happens with this trial today after cohen finishes. it would then be up to the defense the judge saying with no trial on wednesday or friday closing arguments expected next monday so the jury likely could get this case on next monday. back to you in the street studio. >> dana: it might be tuesday because that's memorial day. >> bill: michael waltz and sits on the foreign affairs committee. the wheels of justice grind slowly here in new york, i tell you. i think we had 3 1/2 days of court last week. looks like may

he thought it was a, perhaps it was a federal commission. so somebody called to the international call cajun court and they were africans or whatever. and they got poking and, and it's great. didn't make sense. what about nothing, yahoo and yeah. oh, and i loved the way they never even mentioned the names of that much and 3 other whatever. they don't even mention it. so all of us understand why them, it doesn't make any sense. excuse me, be careful what you asked for. you said it was great. yeah, but, but wait a minute. now was a runaway court, but we didn't, but it wasn't before. the next thing that's interesting is and you're gonna laugh at me gentlemen. so let me apologize in advance. all of a sudden those people who, who idea of, of i guess news is people magazine or whatever. all ma clooney. george clooney is wife george clooney, the, the high priest of the, of cabal, whatever you want to call the woke left is his wife. not only is the is mr. conduct her mentor, but she research just now the left and the right. and we've talked about th

ofjustice at the federal level and through the federal— the federal level and through the federal election commission the circus— prosecute. we're going to see the circus that — prosecute. we're going to see the circus that this trial is continue to move — circus that this trial is continue to move forward. you are starting to see the _ to move forward. you are starting to see the politics come out for the vice presidential possibilities are showing — vice presidential possibilities are showing up, standing up behind president trump. something we've never— president trump. something we've never seen — president trump. something we've never seen in our nations history but seems — never seen in our nations history but seems to be a bit of normal now in american — but seems to be a bit of normal now in american politics, especially with polarised environment that we're _ with polarised environment that we're witnessing. i think this trial will continue to be a focus on the world _ will continue to be a focus on the world stage. it's not everyday you see a _ world stage. it's not everyday you see a forme

, federal trade commission, all of the suppression -- paul: it's almost every day, and youist can't keep track. [laughter] >> yeah, that's right. and simultaneously with the regulation you have a tremendous amount of federal spending going with on. that spending has to be paid for somehow. and so that weighs on the fed's decision about interest rates. it's interesting because joe biden is not getting political credit for anything that he's doing. so this condition of instability and uncertainty, e i i think, is coming back to hurt the biden administering. paul: i want to ask, mary, about a word that has come up here. i've used it, tag nation. stagflation. which means both higher prices and slower growth. 1.if 6 gdp growth in the first quarter with. you had an end crease, as you mentioned, a bump-up in inflation, and yet with jay powell said i haven't seen the stag, and i haven't seen the flation. [laughter] is he right? >> like i said, he's looking in realtime. if the economy grows 1%, 1.a 5% this year, he figures that's okay as long as inflation's coming down. so, again, h

there is evidence, there are documents, then go to the central committee of the russian federation, a commission is being created there, headed by the head of the central committee of the russian federation, and the commission considers all the documents for 7 days, and what should be kept in mind that the time when a person applied for such a postponement, and the commission also considers the time of acceptance decision. a person cannot be mobilized, so there is no need for that, well , don’t worry, you have to go and register, and you also need to say that all men from 18 to 60 go either to tsk, sp, or to tsnapa, or through the register plus, reserve plus, that is now an electronic office and they have recalculated, for that is what is needed to bring it all the same. our reasons for the fact that who has the opportunity for a postponement and who does not, we have a little more minutes left, and the question of whether a person receives the right to a postponement, took care of it, and whether this right can be lost under what circumstances, literally a minute, yes, if the grounds for postpo

it would make clear the commission will exercise its preemption authority on a case-by-case basis to preempt state or local measures that interfere or are incompatible with federalr territory open internet framework. seconds, the order would establish broad, tailored forbearance including no rate regulation, no tariffing, no cost are counted rules and the commission's application of title 2 to broadband providers to ensure the real story environment protects consumers and achieves other important interest respond to billy's while not unnecessarily stifling investment and innovation. consistent with the commission's approaching 2015 the order would not forbear from portions of title 2 that protect consumers from competition, preserve enforcement tools, protect consumer privacy, provide access to infrastructure, support disability access and promote universal -- in order to account for changing national security landscape the commission would also retain its authority with respect to broadband providers in section 214, 218, 219, and 220. third, the order would reinstate straightforward rules that prohibit blocking, throttling or engaging in paid or affiliated prio

finally, we've commissioned the federal trade commission to report to congress on unfair and deceptive trade practices relating to tokens. we have seen also a need to protect consumers and promote innovation. we need rules of the road eventually. this is helping get us there with blockchains. we need more certainty so that we get growth in both blockchain and cryptocurrency firms in the united states giving them and understanding and certainty of the laws and their obligations and also to protect consumers from scams like pump and dump, whitewashing and other financial schemes. for that and more i'm thrilled to be able to have this bill be heard on the floor and i want to thank my colleagues, representatives burgess, trahan, guthrie, castor, my fellow floridian, chairman gus bilirakis and of course our ranking member, frank pallone, for presenting this today. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from florida reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: the gentleman is about to clo

andee also to give the federal election commission more teeth. the federal election commission, they really only about campaign finance. there have any other authority. and probably should have a lot of authority by the way. i'm not recommending that. it's like the election, elections are handled by the states but when it comes to this kind of disclosure around the use of synthetic media, ai generated false content, there is a role. i know many members of congress of both parties that agree this is a role that the fec can play. >> great policies. if i had that magic wand right now i would do it. so for l our last question herei want to endns with giving peopla sense of where we are all coming from. so that after the 20.4 election we could all reflect back on this panel and what we think. i want to read your headlines about ai and election and what t you from each of you in our short time left what you think the fears of ai are overhyped, under hyped, , or just about right. >> the guardian says disinformation imagine ai could erode democracy in the

the deal still has to gain regulatory approval from the us federal trade commission, which could come but a more serious stumbling block is hess�* dispute with exxon mobil over its lucrative guyana assets, which both companies have a stake in. under a joint operating agreement, exxon has a right to refuse the sale of hess�* guyana assets — which is one of the world's fastest growing oil reserves. chevron has said they would pull out of the deal if hess�* guyana stake was not included. let�*s turn to sri lanka now — the government has ordered the nation�*s tea industry to raise workers�* wages by next month. companies that refuse to do so could be taken over by the government. tea producers are warning that the 70% increase in pay for tea workers, to around 5 and a half dollars a day, would hurt their business. sri lankan tea is one of the country�*s biggest exports. the industry is worth at least $1.3 billion and brings in much needed foreign currency into the country. for more we�*rejoined by ganeshan wignaraja, a visiting senior fellow at think tank odi. sri lanka announced this wag

host: before this job you were at the federal trade commission, a position called chief technologist. how does that inform what you do now? guest: the federal trade commission's general consumer protection and one of the competition committees in the united states. my job is to bring understanding of the technology to that policy space. i spend a lot of time looking at reports but also cases and investigations that the ftc was doing to bring that length of technical expertise into the policy work that the federal trade commission was doing. host: before we go into the topic, the abundance institute, how is it supported? guest: it has a wide range of foundation, individual and corporate donors. we are very new so some of that is still being figured out. we just launched in april. host: does money come from the ai community? guest: i am not 100% sure on the details of what companies but i think a lot of the ai community would be very interested in what we are doing. host: when it comes to the topic of the election, your institute put out the first of a series of reports about the electi

>> they want to bring in bradley smith, the former commissioner with the federal election commission.y want to inform jurors about the customs and practices of the fec, the federal election commission, and how they interpret certain words and phrases in the federal campaign finance law. the overall objective is to convince jurors that even if there was a falsification of business records, it cannot possibly be a felony, because there is no underlying crime here. specifically, there was no conspiracy to promote donald trump selection in a way that was executed through unlawful means, chiefly campaign finance donations that violates federal law. the judge has already ruled that he himself is the ultimate arbiter of what the law is. as you know, that is not usually an expert to interpret law, that is what a judge is supposed to do. and indeed, judge merchan has ruled that this expert's testimony will be very circumscribed. he does not need an alternative explanation of what this law is, particularly if jury instructions can get them there. there. >> i have less than 30 seconds but i have

the deal still has to gain regulatory approval from the us federal trade commission, which could comeore serious stumbling block is hess�* dispute with exxon mobil over its lucrative guyana assets, which both companies have a stake in. under a joint operating agreement, exxon has a right to refuse the sale of hess�* guyana assets — which is one of the world's fastest—growing oil reserves. chevron has said they would pull out of the deal if hess�* guyana stake was not included. so far both companies have failed to make progress on terms failed to make progress on term ., ”a: failed to make progress on term ., ”x; , ., ., terms for the $37 billion deal. the clock _ terms for the $37 billion deal. the clock is _ terms for the $37 billion deal. the clock is ticking _ terms for the $37 billion deal. the clock is ticking as - terms for the $37 billion deal. the clock is ticking as the - the clock is ticking as the deadline for negotiations will expire at 5pm london time on wednesday — that�*s midnight for us here in singapore. let�*s turn to sri lanka now — the government has ordered the na

disclosure, mandatory disclosure and real penalties for those who not and also to give the federal election commission more teeth. the federal election commission, most people don't realize, they're really only about campaign finance. they don't have any other authority. and probably shouldn't have a lot of authority by the way. i'm not recommending that. i think it's right that the election -- elections are handled by the states but when it comes to this kind of disclosure around the use of synthetic media, a.i.-generated false content, i think there is a role and i know that there's many members of congress of both parties that are agree that this is a role that the f. e.c. can play. talia: great policies. if i had that pha*pbg wand right now -- magic wand right now, i'd do it. for our last question here, i want to end with giving people a sense of where we're all coming from. so that after the 2024 election we can all reflect back on this panel and what we think. so, i want to redo some headlines about a.i. and elections and i want to hear from each of you in our short time left whether you think t

and therefore, by the way, the federal election commission would have agreed and whether they'll be ableo get that in sounds unlikely. >> but if you had gone to the federal election commission and truthfully disclose, we want to make this payment to stormy daniel's we we want her to go away. we think that it may have some effects on the outcome of the election will you? let's prove this as a campaign expenditure. the fec would have looked at them like, what are you out of your mind? so it can't both be what the prosecutors? it can't both be. wait a second. this is a concealed campaign expenditure if, if the people who make those fine judgments are like wait a note of course it's a personal expense i mean, you know, the john edwards came essentially proof for that. exactly the words case and it creates an interesting legal issue. and i think that's one reason why you strategize to have those two lawyers on there because they're gonna be like getting this. >> do you think that anything today's proceedings change? what do you think that the jury is thinking about this case and also todd bla

federal campaign finance statutes to the justice department on the criminal side and the federal election commission on the civil side. bragg doesn't have jurisdiction to do that and he's being cagey about what the other crime is, the so-called crime that he says trump falsified his business regards to fraudulently cover up and it's hard to follow what he's alleging. liz: that state crime they cited is a misdemeanor and looking at this, is this about reasonable doubt? is there enough reasonable doubt the jury gives the victory to trump? let's go through it, trump organization accountant and also trump organization accounts payable supervisor deborah testified they did not talk to trump about these payments and they didn't have any direct proof of trump's direct involvement and so-called payment to stormy daniels was not hush money and hope hicks testified it was to protect his family and not influencing the election and show the letter again for michael cohen's letter to the federal election commission saying trump was not involved. is there enough reasonable doubt here and the case goes away? >> no

a number of mistakes, not the least of which was not letting brad smith who was on the federal election commission testify on behalf of the defense to talk through federal if election campaign rules. and so i think the there's even a conviction on anything, there's a lot of grounds for an appeal. david: and that's an extraordinary thing, that essentially michael cohen was the one who was explaining because of his own conviction for violations of federal law, he was explaining the to the jury what federal law was where -- and he's a liar. he's a liar, and and as we found out yesterday, he's a thief. so the jury was taking instructions, and it was rowed by the judge on election -- allowed by the judge on election law from a liar and a thief, and they wouldn't let brad smith who was the former chair of the fec testify as to to what really was the law about elections. >> david, that's perfectly illustrative of why this case is such a legal abomination. the judge actually let someone like are michael cohen basically instruct the jury on the law. no witness is allowed to instruct the jury on the law unl

. >> up next, federal communications commission chair jessica and commissioner brandon carr testify on the fcc's 2025 budget request, they addressed the importance of affordable broadband and needed upgrades to the 911 emergency system. the house appropriation hearing is about 90 minutes. [inaudible conversations] [laughter] >> a sub command financial services and general government will come to order like to welcome chairwoman jessica and commissioner car. i appreciate both the participating in today's hearing to give members the subcommittee the opportunity to discuss federal committee this fiscal year 20125 budget requested. the budget request for the commission is more than $4,048,000,000. 15% higher than the original fiscal 2824 enacted a level much harder to increase the commission has historically requests are surprises to the commission failed to request the funding for the secure trusted communication network program rip and replace as you don't rip and replace his important priority particular to ensure the communication infrastructure safe from foreign interference. converse

constitutionally eligible to serve as president and they file a statement of candidacy with the federal election commission and that they have their name appear on enough state ballast to reach a threshold of electoral ballots and votes needed to win the presidency and that they agree to the debates rules and format and that they receive at least 15% in four separate national polls of registered or likely voters that meet cnn's and abc standards. that does exclude presidential candidates or of k junior who said on x president trump and biden are colluding to lock americans in a head-to-head matchup that a 70% say they do not want to. they are trying to exclude me from their debate, getting back to the rest of the tweet, trying to exclude me from their debate that they are afraid i would win, keeping viable candidates all the debate stage undermines democracy. 43% of americans identify as independent and if americans are ever going to escape the hammerlock of the two party system, now is the time to do it. these are the two most unpopular candidates in living memory. by excluding these from the stage, presi

was reading commentaries this fellow brad smith from federal the charges again trump would never have been withheld by the tomorrow election commission. he federal election commission, he did not commit a crime, they were not worried, they were personal matters, they would in the let him testify. my question is costello me michael cohen former lawyer, testified and ripped him to pieces, is the judge trying to rule out what the people are saying in particular costello and even brad smith who said this is not a crime? reporter: well, he has effectively blocked smith from testifying by saying high couhe could only testify to issues that are not central to the allegations again trump. what smith said is what many of us have said, there was no federal election offense. department of justice looked at this did note bridge charges, and -- did not bring charges. and this judge, has allowed jury to hear repeatedly from michael cohen and david pecker and the prosecutors that there was election violations. i am quote confident they believe that there were violations which is not true. and the -- what the judge is saying is that they will contin