those federal laws as well.'ve heard so far from your fellow 2024 challengers, this is a bit of that. >> i think it's an example of this criminalization of politics. >> we've seen the legal system being weaponized against political opponents. that is un-american and unacceptable. >> you know, governor, when we hear those comments from governor desantis and senator scott, a lot of republicans, what we had heard was first, you know, we can't impeach trump, there should be left to the courts, now he's been indicted, and now, suddenly the refrain is how the legal system is being weaponized, that there should be left voters. but of course, when it was left voters in the 2020 election, trump lost that election, he lied about it, he tried to overturn it. and that is why we are here where we are tonight. i mean, how do you even debate a circular argument like the one that you hear from your fellow republicans on that? >> well, it's hard to hold anyone accountable for their actions without argument. and here, i've always

your federal duties. calls as chief of staff, and he was setting up meetings. and i think that, because it is a quite low standard, you just have to make a plausible claim. meadows probably does have a pretty good chance at removing it to federal court. there seems to be some agreement amongst legal scholars and attorneys in georgia that he will have a pretty good chance of it as well, especially considering that the 11th circuit has interpreted the federal removal statute quite liberally. >> yeah. let me read from the filing of his lawyer saying, nothing mr. meadows is alleged to have done in the indictment's criminal per se. original oval office meeting, contacting state officials on the presidents behalf, visited state government building, setting up a phone call for the president. when unexpected president chief of staff to the president of the united states to do these things. -- although, we should know, that the allegation in the rico charges that one of the things he did was illegal per se, which

a federal duty.gia election was conducted in a court of federal law. it would be funny if it weren't so absurd. the president's job does not include telling brad raffensperger to find some extra votes. it certainly does not include any of the charges that fani willis has brought, essentially charging donald trump with being the head of a massive racketeering enterprise. last time i looked, that not part of the presidents job description. the second thing that's required for this law to apply is a plausible federal defense. trump presumably will say, well, i have federal defense. i was the head of the federal government. i am absolutely immune to prosecution. i can do whatever i want. i'm above the law. he's presented various versions of that argument, he's always lost. there are decades of precedent saying that the president's job does not include anything like this. he wasn't doing anything but make some absolutely, and even from a civil damages, as nixon learned in the case nixon versus fitzgerald,

of the federal and state courts. host: we are seeing reports from columbus, ohio -- what are your thoughts about that? guest: ohio passed an anti-gerrymandering statute. it didn't have the clearest remedial solution. how are we supposed to remedy this? this has caused a lot of difficulty in the ohio state supreme court. they also turned over some of the personnel that made those decisions previously so the effort is to say lots of states have these independent redistricting commissions. let's not only have something like that and ohio but let's correct some of the things that have caused some of the turmoil litigation. given what the supreme court has said in previous cases, there is no question the people by initiative can step in and provide that guidance if a majority of the people in the state of ohio say so. host: the case we are talking about, many other supreme court cases, the oral argument for these cases available on our website at c-span.org in the supreme court area. moore v harper is the hello, thank you

>> well, the norm at process is a federal case is tried in federal court or handled in federal court. state case goes forward in a state court. this is a special provision that's been around for almost a couple hundred years now that allows -- the purpose is to protect the functioning of the federal governmental roles by officers who were doing their jobs, to allow them to remove the case from state court to federal court. the question is, does it qualify? the supreme court has decided a number of case on the issue, and the basic rules are, the basic requirements are that, first of all, the official, the federal federal who wants to remove the indicate to federal court, has to have been performing his job. he has to have been acting within the scope of his official responsibilities, but the second requirement of that, whiched lead-in didn't really get into, but it's also a clear requirement that the defendant also has to be advancing a federal legal defense that is plausible to the state charges, so it's whether there's a reason for the material government to interrupt that and say, n

when a fire comes, i understand that when we don't have enough federal firefighters, federal appropriations are used to reimburse the state agency for the rate it pays as firefighters, or are used to pay the private contractor, whatever it wishes to charge. now, with, that does that mean the firefighters are receiving increased pay, and the federal government is paying for, it and it is better for them to work for an outside group then from within? >> i will start. yes, senator. that is accurate. we of course depend on our cooperators and contractors, they are an important part of our system. but we are not able to compensate our firefighters. they leave and worked for those and, these the federal government will still pay for that. >> is that a code, like it is our fault as well? >> it's just how the system works. we all cooperate together, it is an expensive endeavor for the federal government. >> well, we will pay the contract or whatever. >> in a busy year forever, a 2021, the forest service paid over $470 million to state cooperators. >> mr. rupert, real quick. >> two points to that. o

>> we'll, if he ultimately was charged in federal court, and convicted in federal court.es, i think it would negated, because the state case would be presumably dismiss. and, then it would become a federal action. but i think, clearly the importance of the state prosecutions, are investigation that took us to the supreme court twice, to get the records from donald trump, my cisa now d. a. willis. these are important backstops. and i'll tell you why is an example. we star on vesta geisha and into the trump investigation finances and the like. , and the u.s. attorney in new york, who is a wonderful person, their office asked me to stand out, with our case. i felt i should, because i feel we need -- between these agencies, and i did. but to my surprise, after my michael, cohen pleaded guilty, the case dropped in the southern district. so we lost a year and a half, and it proves, i think anderson, that you need to approach these issues with a spirit of yes, let's not argue about silly things, let's try to work together. but at the end of the day, the state needs to look of af

some of them wouldn't have any plausible federal defense in federal court.d determine each one on his or her own merits. >> that seems fair. random state senator or a publicist for a rapper at least at this point in our country's history doesn't count as a federal official. chuck rosenberg former u.s. attorney, former senior fbi official, clarion as always. chuck, thank you so much. >> thank you, rachel. >> we'll be right back. stay with us. u were on vacation? it's too expensive. use priceline, they've got deals no one else has. what about work? i got you. looking great you guys! ♪ go to your happy price ♪ ♪ priceline ♪ detect this: living with hiv, i learned i can stay undetectable with fewer medicines. that's why i switched to dovato. dovato is a complete hiv treatment for some adults. no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this: most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. if you have hepatitis b, don't stop dovato without talking to your doctor. don't take dovato

some of them wouldn't have any plausible colorable federal defense in federal court. it makes more sense to me that you would determine each one on his or her own merits. >> that seems fair. random state senator or a publicist for a rapper at least at this point in our country's history doesn't count as a federal official. chuck rosenberg former u.s. attorney, former senior fbi official, clarion as always. chuck, thank you so much. >> thank you, rachel. >> we'll be right back. stay with us. x this. (alternate voice) poligrip power hold + seal gives our strongest hold and 5x food seal. if your mouth could talk, it would ask for... poligrip. how can you sleep on such a firm setting? gab, mine is almost the same as yours. almost is just another word for not as good as mine. save 50% on the sleep number® limited edition smart bed. plus, 60-month financing on all smart beds. shop now only at sleep number®. >>> five members of one pro trump armed paramilitary group will appear in court tomorrow for a hearing that may well decide the course of the rest of their lives. proud

to the federal constitution? mr. thompson: co your honor. justice sotomayor:ou are disputing that the state courts can't review a staislative voting system to find whether it complies with ate constitution? mr. thompson: well, it can for procedural reasons like in smiley. justice sotomayor: let's go to the substantive procedural reasons. the distinction makes no sense constitution, as i mentioned earlier, controls,e procedural issuee, place, and manner. but take a line-item veto provision, for e. in more than 40 states, these prns empower governors to accept or reject legislation by altering its content. iffoexample, a governor partially vetoes a bill to appropriate funds to administer congressional elections, i a substantive constraint or procedural constraint? just ar no. mr. thompson: it's procedural. that has to be jumped through. justice sotomayor: okay, so the or vetoes a map drawn by the legislature and decides it's constitutionally permitted. why is it substantive? mr. thompson: we a saying. we are saying

if it was moved to federal court and all was moved to federal court, would that negate that? >> well, if he ultimately was charged in federal court and convicted in federal court, yes, i think it would any gate it because the state case would be presumably dismissed and then it would become a federal action, but i think clearly the importance of the state prosecutions, our investigation that took us to the supreme court twice to get the records from donald trump, my successor's case now d.a. willis, these are important backstops and i'll tell you why as an example, if i may. we started our investigation into the trump organization finances and the like and the u.s. attorney in new york, who is a wonderful person, asked their office asked me to stand down with our case. i felt i should, because i feel we need comity between the agencies and i did but to my surprise after michael cohen pleaded guilty the case dropped in the southern district so we lost a year and a half and it proves, i think, anderson that you need to approach these issues with the spirit of, yes, let's not ar

federal employee and i'm not| a federal employee and i'm not sure _ a federal employee and i'm not surebe, that - sure if there will be, that said. _ sure if there will be, that said. this _ sure if there will be, that said, this is _ sure if there will be, that said, this is definitely- said, this is definitely outside _ said, this is definitely outside of— said, this is definitely outside of the - said, this is definitely outside of the scope i said, this is definitely. outside of the scope of said, this is definitely- outside of the scope of their jobs — outside of the scope of their jobs as— outside of the scope of their jobs as government - outside of the scope of their- jobs as government employees. to stay— jobs as government employees. to stay with _ jobs as government employees. to stay with you. _ jobs as government employees. to stay with you, we _ jobs as government employees. to stay with you, we have - jobs as government employees. to stay with you, we have to - to stay with you, we have to let you go in a few moments but what you have seen from the da, very outspoken spea

in federal election cases. in the future he says the courts should and will distort -- distill that general principle into a more specific standard such as when advanced by chief justice rehnquist. what is he talking about their on this principle advanced by justice rehnquist? guest: back in 2000 and bush versus gore, it was a contentious decision out of the florida supreme court and the united states supreme court. a majority of the court and a 5-4 decision and there was no formal author but we know from recent papers that it was justice kennedy that took the lead in writing the opinion. that opinion relied on equal protection clauses of the constitution saying that votes were treated unequally. chief justice rehnquist wrote separately with scalia and thomas. he said we are worried about these circumstances where the state court goes too far. he said impermissibly distorted the legislatures scheme or transcends the appropriate limitations of statutory review which some of the justices even and dissenting opini

which says that any case involving a federal official or one acting on behalf of a federal official should be removed to federal court and it should be done liberally and broadly. the presumption should be in favor of removal. so we should all file a motion in the federal court to remove the case from her and the georgia court, ask for a trial in the federal court. >> so there's a lot to unpack there. let me ask you to do it, carol, particularly that the presumption should be in favor of removal. >> well, the first thing i disagree with mr. giuliani on is that fani willis has not thought about this, i guarantee you, she has thought about this. she is aware of it, but she is probably not that familiar with it in the sense that she has not had to deal with this issue in the prior racketeering indictments that she's brought because those indictments were really based on georgia events, on atlanta events. so this is somewhat new to her in a criminal context. what it means is that if you were a federal government official and you are being charged with state crimes, you are allowed to bring a m

the amount of federal support is 50 billion rubles.ue to of which it is planned to supply more than six thousand buses to support our colleagues from other federal executive bodies , the fifth in line, the ministry of construction, the provision of infrastructure budget loans. ion in the amount of 32 billion rubles. for the period until 2025, the planned delivery of 830 units of vehicles is the sixth in line, the ministry of natural resources, the purchase of public transport under the program, clean air, the amount of federal support is 3.6 billion rubles. this year it is planned to deliver 128 vehicles of the seventh line minvost development procurement of public transport within the framework of the program for the development of the far eastern federal district the amount of federal support is about 200 million rubles. this year, with regard to this support measure , it is planned to supply a family of vehicles, so the total amount of federal support, including budget loans from all existing programs , is about 260 billion rubles.

federal check.r. katyal: i think there probably would be. side somehow disclaimingother statutes and sayin shouldn't, so we don't think you should get into statutes here at all. but i do worry the blast radius of this theory is going to reach statutes and that's something this court should worry about. justice barrett: thank you. chief justice roberts: justice jackson? justice jackson: yeah. to follow up on what justice barrett just said. i'm wondering whether the answer about why a state constitution is different in this context is because the state constitution is the font of authority for all the relevant parties in terms of this di and i understand we have the peculiar circue of the state supreme court being the one to interpret the state constitution. but it is ent in terms of its consequence and stature than a statute. am i wrong in thinking about it that way? mr. katyal: no, we think you're absolutely right. and so that's why state constitutions reflect the most fundamental principl, ke the f

he has not been charged federally. he has been much less of a presence than we are used to around donald trump. and he is one of the people about whom i think the former president is the most concerned about what they may or may not have said. certainly a lot of aides around trump are concerned about what he may or may not have said in various investigations. >> also the questions of how that affects what jack smith is trying to do. clearly if he's trying to use him. the other thing, just reading through the indictment, a lot of it is things that we knew that had happened, what they did. but also i was just struck, 12 of the 161, you know, overt acts as fani willis referred to them were trump's tweets. >> yeah. and public -- and others were public statements. yeah. i mean, this is -- look, we talked about this a lot with the tweets, that they were just things he was doing, there was that joke about i was about to write a story and trump just tweeted it out, right? i mean, this was literally they were planning all these

so all the rest are all federal agencies.long with a layer, a governor, the national association of tribal historic preservational officers and the national conference of state historic preservation officers. >> so, what are some of the controversial cases that have come before the advisory council? >> the dakota pipeline as you might recall involved a pipeline that would go across a waterway that was of significance. that has gone several ways. the courts have improved it and have re-examined the permitting so that is one of the controversial areas. there's a number of cases however that demonstrate the productive work of the advisory council and we would love to focus on those. they are very diverse, so you have a park in the san diego area. you have the space shuttles that have been determined eligible. you have one of the last remaining black officers clubs at fort leonard wood in missouri that was saved. having been associated with this agency for almost 40 years, i take great pride, and they do too, in the way in which

the federal one would not. would donald trump, do you think, in the event that this does actually get heard in a georgia court, where cameras are allowed, would he, do you think, embrace that? or would he try to get cameras barred from the courthouse? >> i actually think he would embrace it, jake, although i don't think there's unanimity of opinion around him about how to handle that. i think your point about legal experts think there is a real chance. it's not definite, obviously, but there's a chance the removal motion, meaning asking this trial to be moved to federal court because these actions being taken the capacity of his office. prosecutors would argue it was outside his capacity. but he was a federal office holder. there is a non-zero chance that that happens. if that happens this does change things significantly. >> it doesn't have anything to do with whether or not somebody thinks donald trump is guilty or not guilty. this is just a question of law. and the law would seem to say there's a plausible c

in federal court in georgia, in federal court in d.c.. report, allen foyer, wrote a scene setting piece about the pro hearings today. from the new york times, for the morning paper this morning. reminding us of where this may be heading. he said towards the end of his article this morning, quote, the timetable from mr. trump's four trials have taken an outsized importance. not only because there were so many of, them but also because they were unfolding against trump's crowded cabinet are. as the candidate leading the field for the republican party's 2024 presidential nomination. trump has made no secret in private conversation with his aides. of his desire to solve his jumble of legal problems by winning the election. quote, if i'll there of the two federal charges that he's confronting are delayed on till the election, and he prevails in the election, he could seek to pardon himself after taking office. or have his attorney general dismissed the matters altogether. and i know that learning that trump has been saying that privately to hi

[000:00:00;00] and in the states that are part of the osce, the russian federation immediately started provocations, they immediately started shouting in a remote format, this is practically impossible, as you understand, because they connected there from different computers with different names, and it was sent only there for the representative of russia during the organization of security cooperation in europe. therefore, we have already established this for sure and we can see our experience in this regard, therefore, the russian federation was not needed at this meeting in saudi arabia. well, what about the countries whose participation was surprising? our biggest victory, of course, it is participation, i ask, it is indisputable, and we see that china is starting to play an increasingly larger role in the formation of these principles on which peace in ukraine will be formed . there are several reasons why china is starting to take a more active role. it is pleasant for us that everyone wants to be on the side of the winners, and in the future to take part in the reconstruction of

do the cases stay in federal court?s, in fulton county at this courthouse behind me? and there is a question, what happens with donald trump? all the arguments around this are about these people being somehow connected or protected by the mission of the federal government. things that they were doing either in david shafer's case as an elector, mark meadows, as top officials are working on behalf of the president. but then there is donald trump himself. the president of the united states at that time, and all of them are trying to invoke this clause. this law that allows them to say we would like to take this over to federal court because that is where we can do this, because we were federal officials at the time regarding these allegations that the prosecutors are making here. so how that plays out and what the law is going to be here, we're really in uncharted waters with a case like this against the former president. >> we certainly are. thank you so much for that breaking news. kaitlyn poleants live for us from the

the third extremely important point is that the russian federation does not have much power to inflict on such ships because there was already a third case when naval drones attacked russian ships, which, in principle , should deter international shipping from exercising their right to free navigation, the law of ukrainian ports, that is, these factors are important, but unfortunately, that did not happen what did ukraine ask to be or under the flags of nato member states clearly from the same turkey, which by the way is in second place , let's say, recipients of the benefits from the black sea grain initiative, they it seems that there are more than 3 million grains per year bought from the ukrainian actually it would be the only one for a civilian vessel under the turkish flag or any country and members of nato or what really we would like even more that congo or it will be turkish together will the turks make a decision and run the black sea black, uh, not the black sea, european or american . unfortunately, this did not happen, and everyone is talking about diplomacy, everyone is s

chairman whether appeal - it concerned not only the russian federation. it also concern agreements with some of the more than 200 active within the cis, and from belarus, of which more than 100 are active? i will be grateful for the answer. thank you . i think in belarus we will solve this issue much faster because there are an order of magnitude fewer of them . thank you. volodymyr mykhailovych petrovich good afternoon, dear colleagues, i am also pleased to hear from mr. chairman that we will once and for all honestly stop the strange tradition of once a month making a decision to terminate agreements with the russian federation in the end. i really hope we will do it with one decision once and for all . we will support any necessary resources for any gothic talks about cooperation with the russian federation, but it must be understood that we need a quarantine against the russian federation and in one very important on the spiritual plane we need a quarantine against the influence of the russian orthodox church in ukraine, so i am very indignant about t

you mark meadows wanting to make this a federal trial in georgia.l trump could not be pardoned even if it is a federal trial, though it will drop from a larger more white jury pool if it becomes a federal trial not just fulton county. but on this other case, march 4, the significance of this, then the significance of trump's lawyer raising the case of the scottsboro boys as why trump should be charged -- tried in two years rather than next year? >> yes, it is offensive so i think the important lesson from the scottsboro boys case is in alabama and the early 1930's, powers that be who use the criminal justice system in order to reenter was white supremacy, all-white juries, rushed sham trials, lack of criminal processes and procedure. that is not what is happening here in washington, d.c., in the special counsel case at all. donald trump has been afforded every opportunity to have a robust defense. the evidence being laid before the federal court has been the byproduct of a very long intense investigation. it is real evidence. he has every opportunit

of federal law in execution of their federal duties.urious to me about that, he has to be, essentially, alleging and arguing, that he was acting on presidential orders to do everything he did, within the confines of his job. in other words, he was not acting as a campaign volunteer, after hours and on weekends, but rather was executing the orders of donald trump. we'll see what happens with that. he may have a plausible case for getting it removed. it's interesting, he wants to get out of state court and fly back to the safety of the federalist society packed federal courts. in any event, i believe it's in the 11th circuit where the court is considering another rico action, which is, donald trump's rico lawsuit against hillary clinton. which was thrown out of the district court level, now being considered by the 11th court. we're getting so much of donald trump litigation and prosecution, whereas other than the defendant or the plaintiffs, he might have to argue different sides on the same legal issue in different cases that are appeari

a federal judge there rejected the argument you may recall.owever, that may not be the case in georgia where trump is facing 13 counts because for trump, taking the case federal could have several advantages. and also the charges very different than in the hush money case here. for one, jurors. a trial in the u.s. district court for the northern district of georgia would draw from a much wider jury pool than the current case in fulton county where trump is not popular to say the least. case in point, former president trump earned 26% of the vote there, just 26% of the vote back in 2020. and there is as well another benefit for trump. and that is judges. he has appointed four of the 15 judges on the northern district of georgia district court bench that would give him a decent chance of getting one of his own picks for the trial. we should note that trump drew one his own you additional appointees in the classified documents case, that of course being judge canon ejudge aileen. and if it moves to federal court, there is a chance that he could p

they opened the wrestling federation so that the wrestling federation can give a speech in a few moments. if the conference hall of the wrestling federation, which is the opening ceremony of the authorized places of the wrestling federation, is being held , thank you. which will be hosted by budapest, hungary, in the 400 meters relay team of the usa, italy and jamaica, and after winning the 100 and 200 meters , he won his third gold in these competitions, and in the 800 meters , marcos from canada in the carpet with duplan tice javelin. from sweden and canada's wrestlers became the champions of the country's junior wrestling championships, the mazandaran team won the championship, and alborz north khorasan teams took the second and third places . the wrestling competitions were hosted by qazvin. and it will be held in the elementary level of juniors, and i know that it is very good from all the cities of the competitions. they were good. a review of some short news on the fourth day of the world championship in duisburg . today, in order to get a quota for the olympics, he will compete i

of this one federal decision? >> i would say that i personally can think of examples where we are actively engaging with resource agencies proactively. we are talking about the timelines that have been established. i've been in the role for six months, and i don't know if i can say that i have a project from start to finish in that two-year timeframe. >> okay. so we need to keep following up on that. and lastly, you testified that fhwa is administering nearly 900 awards, and the sort of follows on to that one federal decision. i mean i guess we could follow up with you and your staff more specifically. how many of those awards actually have project grant agreements in place. are we getting to the end point here? you have a lot going on, and we understand that, but are the awards being made in a timely fashion to satisfy you? because we are hearing some blow back on that. >> thank, you ranking member. so we are working very closely with any of the award recipients to make sure that there is a grant agreement in pla

they are evaluating the credit worthiness of the federal government. according to fitch, we always had a aaa highest rating and they have lowered it to a aa+, which is an indication they are a little less pertinent in the u.s. ability to constantly repay the debt. fitch is one of the big three credit agencies. all three have credit ratings on the u.s. government. s&p lowered their rating in 2011, so now two out of three credit agencies have lowered the rating because of federal debt. this is an indication they believe the risk of default is not high, but has gone up a bit because of the size of the debt, the continued borrowing, the political troubles and coming to agreements on spending. they are all things places like the congressional budget office have been pointing out to congress for years and years as being concerns. host: we will get more to that rationale, but what does it mean for the u.s. government and taxpayers? guest: in the near term -- there has been a little disruption in the credit markets, the cost of borrowing has gone up a little b

removed in federal court.ome guilty pleas, statistically 90 to 95% of defendants plead guilty. this case may be unique, but i think it is fair to guess some will plead guilty in this case. then, those who remain will be separated into smaller groups for child purposes. you know you can really only commonly about five or six parties and their lawyers in a courtroom, and have that jury really be able to keep track of who is, who which evidence lines up with which a defendant. i would suspect at some point, the judge will ask funny willis to propose -- how can we present a testimony most efficiently in these various trials? this would be talking about the scheme. one that is very interesting and perhaps go back to the point about using rico's ingenious, because it allows all these different schemes to come on in. in one case, under one umbrella, so the jury gets to hear about all the other, stuff even if we are only focused on a handful of these defendants in a particular trial. because, as long as they have that

we are federal agency and that's the major difference. we're a federal agency. they are a member organization-- >> but a nonprofit. >> nonprofit. and they have a charter. it's from the government in 1949 and their role has changed over-- or their approach, their orientation has changed over the years, but they're a very important partner, too, in the work that we're doing and they have a number of-- actually worked for them for a part of my career for a number of years, so, i'm pretty familiar with the work that they do and they're an important member of our team. >> now, you mentioned early on in our discussion that environmental issues are very important when it comes to historic press are evaluation. >> yeah, yes. we consider the cultural environment part of the environmental movement. in fact, as the acting chairman of the council at this point i have set up a task force to deal with climate change and this focuses directly on our native american stripes, our native american citizens who have a direct connection with the national features in our country and

if they come to the same base as the russian federation is today.ell, there will be no, putin will be a patron so that there is still some uh creature nearby, so it’s not about the last name, after all, it’s about the fact that this russia needs to be changed by the whole world, because leaving such a country is a dangerous country, a sponsor of terrorism, as well as officially recognized, god bless so that you know that this is a terrorist country. well, give it a go and recycle it, so that the harrows of god start again, some kind of war from the territory of this country is changing russia, e-e, what is done every night in the regions, i mean drones that hit military objects e-e in some industrial enterprises that night, seven regions of the russian federation were attacked at the pskov airfield, four planes were destroyed and two were damaged in 76, well, that is, these are quite serious losses for russia, because as far as i remember ill-76 e-e in russia, they the total number is 110, that is, it is exactly the excursion, these are exactly the

of the agreement between the cabinet of ministers of ukraine and the government of the russian federation on radmists, end of quotation, so dear colleagues, please support the decision of the committee and adopt the proposed draft bill based on the general basis and taking into account the proposal of the committee. thank you for your attention. thank you, dear colleagues. the need to discuss please sign up two for two against of course please buzhansky maksym arkadiyovych servant of the people e-e dear colleagues excuse me speech according to the content, let's vote and support without unnecessary talk, thank you, please, the floor is given to the people's deputy aryev e.e. volodymyr igarochu faction of the european solidarity political party , pass the floor to mykolik na zhizn knyazhytsky lekerstv thank you dear friends well, i would like to draw your attention to the fact that we are not denouncing this agreement, but in fact we are suspending for an indefinite period. obviously , this needs to be done, and it is obvious that european solidarity will vote for it, because it is difficu

naturally, the federation and the subtext of the federation of the organization of the league are ready. the basis of policy making is how many product sectors are busy for us this year, one is the national competition sector, and in practice, next to it , there are national team competitions in different categories, and basically these calendars should be with each other. the national teams and the events before romeon, while it is not necessary, basically, the league organization is a private sector and does its work efficiently, which is in the football sector and in the futsal sector. i told all this that the pharmacy is open 24 hours a day, and all our work in the football federation and the league organization is a responsibility for convenience from his side, and on the other hand, it is natural when we are faced with a crowd that is outside the stadium. all in some kind of football sport in the existing country of chasing seconds he thinks how difficult it will be, and we hope that he will finally be able to become a professional in the country's clubs from 2010, and that it wil

that doesn't really seem to apply to federal cases. it may all depend on the difference between an overt act, a criminal act, towards the finish line, not necessarily criminal, and a racketeering -- which is the meat and potatoes of reclaim, which is -- we -- and what [inaudible] >> glenn, there is reason for mark meadows lawyers to be helpful. here is a judge raising this question of, is one sufficient? they will clearly argue that one is sufficient, then they will go to the indictment and tried to pick out the one, the incident in the indictment that they say is arguably something he did in the regular course of his job, therefore, because there is one there they can point to, then this definitely should be moved to federal court. >> yeah, but i think there's a fundamental challenge for mark meadows here, and for judge jones. it seems like he is struggling in earnest to make sure he makes, not only the right decision, but a fully support-able decision. one way or another, it is likely to get appealed. he's getting his ducks in a row

session under the patronage of the federation website.eld a number of very important international events. this is the tenth neva environmental forum in st . this project has already grown. well, almost all subjects and, well, the russian federation of the russian region today is not just cooperating, but already the volume of this cooperation and mutual trade is investment and joint projects. they really correspond to the scale of the union state. e implemented the second year in a row very much. well, just wonderful. uh, last year's memory search project. it was a russian belarusian project, and in this one we invited the countries of the eurasian economic union 200 children 16 days by train. u visit eight russian cities and eight belarusian cities connected with the history of the great patriotic war. where there are monuments , museums, monuments. the children are completely different after this trip and the eightieth anniversary of the victory of the great patriotic war. we want to do the same in memory search for high school student

what federal law defense that -- the theory would be that you want the federal court to be deciding this law defense, because the sort of background purpose of the statute was the worry that states might somehow interfere with the performance of federal functions. well, the one argument the president has made over and over again in a general way, and has always been rejected, is basically a sweeping claim of immunity. he was the president, therefore nobody could prosecute him for anything, for anything he did while he was president. but again, the conduct that is at issue here isn't conduct that there's any plausible defense too. now, another thing he said lately is that because he has a first amendment argument that he's making. and that's been roundly rejected and really, i think, laughed at by a lot of people. because the line, in fact the indictment jack smith submitted and filed, was one that clearly said, you have a right to say anything you want. but you don't have a right by your words or buy anything else to commit actual crimes. and that's a very, very clear live. so the argume

and how is it protected by what is it on the territory of the russian federation?ssian troops are present on the air force, but they announce that they are there. they are preparing for a battle, a clash with some of our military formations, is this at all? the kakhovskaya hydroelectric power station concerned that it was blown up by me, even though the russians were there for whom it was calculated, it is difficult enough for russia that what you are talking about is too logical. it requires too much analysis . today, russia is not an analytical country and unfortunately some of our partner countries also do not analyze these things. let's put it this way, the motives, opportunities, tools, etc., which you are talking about today, it is absolutely impossible to commit a terrorist attack on any object of the russian federation, which is really under the protection of the guard, a huge number of guards, the same as was the case with the kakhovsky hpp in the same way as regards the as, the only tool, the only possibility to perform any action on these objects is only

for the federal prosecutors, and sol the federal prosecutors, and so that's— the federal prosecutors, _ that's normally what we would see. so there is a little bit of— so there is a little bit of overlapping _ so there is a little bit of overlapping here - so there is a little bit of. overlapping here between so there is a little bit of- overlapping here between the so there is a little bit of— overlapping here between the jack smith— overlapping here between the jack smith case — overlapping here between the jack smith case regarding _ overlapping here between the jack smith case regarding january - overlapping here between the jack smith case regarding january the i overlapping here between the jack. smith case regarding january the 6th and the _ smith case regarding january the 6th and the case — smith case regarding january the 6th and the case in— smith case regarding january the 6th and the case in georgia. _ smith case regarding january the 6th and the case in georgia. with- smith case regarding january the 6th and the case in georgia. with that i and the case in georgia. with

we have five seeking to move to federal court. we expect donald trump to be pushing for the same motion. we have two defendants now seeking a speedy trial. some want to slow this down, some want to speed it up. the judge and the litigants have a lot to work out over the next few weeks. >> switching gears to the d.c. case and the federal investigation case into alleged election interference, ken, we know judge chutkan is on the stand, told the court neither date, neither the one the plaintiffs or the defendants are proposing is acceptable. what can you tell us? >> that's right. judge tanya chutkan is nothing if not prompt. she scheduled the hearing at 10:00 a.m. she immediately dove into it. the two sides could not be farther apart on when this trial should start. jack smith was proposing a trial date of january, and the trump side wanted it to be april of 2026. the judge said both of you are too far apart and neither proposal is acceptable. we do expect her to set a tentative trial date during this hearing. that may or may not hol

-- will be no television in the federal proceeding as fully the federals of that -- because there areevidence. beyond the jury pool though, there's one thing i wanna mention, it's not unheard of for federal courts in high profile cases where they have trouble striking a jury to go for a district -- you do have a constitutional requirement that then you have to be laid, as the constitution calls it, in the district where the crime occurred. we don't have any right to have a venue from a particular division, so in the atlanta division jurors would necessarily be the jurors who heard it if someone needed a writer jury pool they could do a district-wide veneer which could capture parts of house district 14, georgia district 14 which is marjorie taylor greene's district. >> okay, there is potential jurors mark meadows might want. barbara mcquade, it might be that mark meadows and his lawyer believed that moving this to federal court is the whole thing, like there's no hope without it. why else would you put the defendant on the stand? >> i think it's right, two things about that, lawrence.

the right to move a federal case to federal court.it doesn't apply here. i think there are three reasons. one is you have to be performing a federal function. and donald trump, as president, or mark meadows, as his chief of staff, are not performing a federal function. the president, in our constitution, has huge sweeping powers. but the one place our founder said the president had no role is with the electoral college. and for the best of reasons. because, who is the person who has the most self interest in the electoral college, how it functions, how the votes are president counted? the president, the sitting president. -- so, our founders cut the president entirely out of the electoral college. and in order for this case to be moved for any of the defendants, they have to be performing the federal function. these folks just weren't. the second thing is, there's no federal cover-able offense, which is -- necessary. i don't think there's any immunity claim or anything like that that is going to cut the mustard. and lastly, in order t

to federal court.ike to remind people, it's actually a two-step process. can you get in the door to federal court, can you stay in federal court? it's really actually a pretty low bar in terms of standard to get into federal court. whether he succeeds in getting his cases dismissed, because of the supremacy clause, which gives him purported immunity for the actions he took, when he was chief of staff, it's left to be seen. >> one last quick note, though there is a second bucket of people that are trying to get a federal court, alex. those are the georgia fake electors that have been charged in this scheme. there's three of them. they have a very novel concept to get into federal court. they're saying, as a, quote, what is the word they used, contingent, presidential elector. >> okay. >> i was acting as a federal official. so, i got to go to federal court. that is a completely novel theory, it's gonna be left to be seen as to whether that is successful. >> what are you hearing, kenneth chesebro and now,

a federal district judge setting -- mark meadows request to move charges to federal court. this will be an early test for fani willis. earlier today she asked the atlanta judge overseeing the case to set two dates, september 5th for the arraignment, and a trial date of march 4th. rudy giuliani has said he'll surrender to authorities some time next week. no sign this changes his timetable. sources also el the us that lawyers for the former president are in, quote, ongoing negotiations with d.a. willis' office. and early indication are that they too are discussing a date next week. as to a trial date, if nothing changes, which it almost certainly will, take a look, it's wedged in with proposed dates for other trials, civil, criminal. in january, the federal election subversion trial and the e. jean carroll defamation trial part two, plus the iowa caucuses that month. then march with georgia's case followed by the new york hush money trial. finally in may there's the mar-a-lago documents trial. again, all proposed dates. nothing set in stone. that calendar will change. joining

if it's in the statute 28 usc 1442 a which permits a federal official to move the case to federal courto ask you, because you bring up the statute, 1442 and what that statute says, is that you basically have to be within the outer perimeter of the official duties of office. and we just saw in the new york case when they tried to move the bragg case to federal court, judge hellerstein said, no. those actions were not within that perimeter. are you so sure hthese are? >> i am sure they are. that's a very different case. a very different case. that case, what the judge went off on was that donald trump, according to the judge's findings, did those on his personal agenda. having to do with stormy daniels, covering up an embarrassing situation. in this case it -- remove any criminal case from state court if it's for or relating to any act performed by or for them under color of their office. the 11th circuit construes to broadly. it was amended to not require any causal connection. so there is an 11th circuit case, caver versus alabama electric co-op, if associated with the official position

now, he's asking a federal court to remove the fulton county case from federal jurisdiction. the judge denied that request, so earlier today his attorney arranged bond and he has a lot of the same restrictions that other defendants have. he cannot talk about the case with other defendants or witnesses except through lawyers. on monday he will have a hearing in that federal case in an effort to get his fulton county prosecution moved to a federal jurisdiction. if he can get it moved there, he will be protected from the federal laws, that everything he did in his role as chief of staff. fani will es said, no, it was political activity, not part of your job as chief of staff. i think the focus will be the call to brad raffensperger. so that will be something to watch on monday. we know other people will try to get their cases removed as well. >> reporter: just stunning to see mark meadows' manage shot, the former chief 6 staff, it's just remarkable. but it's not just the district attorney who says, no, no, no that was not just official duties. people like marc short, vice presid