. >> they're going to be lifting liens and canceling judgments. >> reporter: not long after belk hadlindeberrys received their news. >> i'd say the first thing i felt was just a tremendous weight was gone. >> cancellation of judgment. >> reporter: advocate health, the parent company of atrium was canceling the judgment against them. zeroing out the $92,000 of debt that was hanging over their heads. >> we're both just ecstatic. >> reporter: advocate heth has stopped taking new liens out and is canceling judgments against 11,500 families in six states, totaling millions of dollars. in a statement telling nbc news, quote, removing judgment liens on homes to recover unpaid medical bills was a natural next step in our ing efforts to make sure patients aren't burdened by medical costs. you built it and part of it belonged to the healthcare system. but now it belongs to you again. >> yeah, it's ours. >> reporter: the lindeberrys now free to enjoy their health and their home. christine romans, north carolina. >>> the eras tour may have ended. but the accolades keep coming in for taylor swift

. >> they're going to be lifting liens and canceling judgments. >> reporter: not long after the callfelt was a tremendous weight was gone. >> cancelation of judgment. >> reporter: advocate health, the parent company of atrium, was canceling the judgment against them. zeroing out the $92,000 of debt that was hanging over their heads. >> we're both just ecstatic. >> reporter: advocate health has stopped taking new liens out and is canceling judgments against 11,500 families in six states totaling millions of dollars. in a statement telling nbc news, quote, removing judgment liens on homes to recover unpaid medical bills was a natural next step in our continuing efforts to make sure patients aren't burdened by medical costs. >> you built it and part of it belonged to the health care system, but now it belongs to you again. >> yeah. it's ours. >> reporter: the couple now free to enjoy their health and their home. christine romans, north carolina. >>> and coming up, how neighbors helped dick van dyke escape from this week's wildfire. the hollywood legend invites us into his home to talk a

in minimum-wage judgment of the standards would apply. and i think not the same standard would be applicable there. >> data center opening to say that it was justoney we would not address this. fear and convincing standard it all. >> so the cordis frame to the here is essential in t to be deprivation never applied in the context pretty so the clear and convincing standard is just money damages and so i think the presumption is at strongest when you're in a conventional remediesamike moneyages. it's a very narrow category. without a constitutional backdrop deportation naturalization kids of the workers government action without. >> we do about the fact that the actually thought in the more signt work and just providing dages in a particular scenario. and when congress enacted the flsa the talked about the fact that they wernterested stays beyond money damages tt setting of the statute limited insured competitive advantage by pacifying employees and protect certain groupsby protecealth andell-being also the notion spreading provement throug

that relationship raised questions of judgment.ow thanks to this astonishing case questions of judgment again. >> a number of unexplained drones have been spotted in the skies of new jersey and pennsylvania have residents and lawmakers concerned. speaking at a briefing today, the white house national security spokesperson john kirby said the u.s. government has no evidence the drone sightings pose a national security or a public safety threat. >> we have no evidence the reported drone sightings pose a national security or a public safety threat or have a foreign nexus. the department of homeland security and fbi are investigating these sightings and they are working closely with state and local law enforcement to provide resources using numerous detection methods to better understand their origin using very sophisticated electronic detection technologies provided by federal thorities. we have not been able to and neither have state or local law enforcement authorities corroborate any of the reported visual sightings. to the contrar

but in this civil fraud case, trump's team, you know, they lost this judgment. judge found that trump had fraudulently inflated the value of his properties to obtain better rates on loans and insurance. the judge ordered $454 million for him to pay, which that dollar amount keeps ticking higher with interest. it has been on appeal. they argued it in september, but because of the election, trump's lawyers trying to get the ag to drop it. in this letter. the ag's team says the trial is over. final judgment has been rendered and defendants appeal to the first department has been fully submitted and argued mr. trump's official duties will not be impeded while awaiting the first department's decision. mr. trump's upcoming inauguration as the next president of the united states has no bearing on the pendency of defendant's appeal in this action, so really trying to draw a distinct line between the civil cases trump has faced and the criminal ones as well. >> jim and carol, i guess we didn't expect letitia james to to drop this, to just drop this. so i guess it's now t

. >>> plus, what happens to those civil judgments that trump is still facing?ming up next. >>> trump may avoid criminal prosecution over the january 6th attack on the capitol for now, but those cases were not the only avenues for accountability for trump. trump is still facing multiple civil lawsuits that were filed against him by lawmakers and police officers for january 6th. what's more, those lawsuits survived one attempt by trump to dismiss them years ago, and longstanding supreme court precedent affirms that sitting presidents may be subject to civil lawsuits while they're in office. trump already faces massive civil judgments against him, including more than a $450 million civil fraud judgment that was entered against him in the case brought by new york attorney general letitia james. and the sexual abuse and defamation judgments two federal juries in new york awarded to writer e. jean carroll totaling over $88 million. back with us for more brilliance is msnbc legal analyst barb mcquaid. barb, let's start with those civil cases. i like to say, don't slee

they wa us to reverse, which usually suggests th they think the judgment can't be suaid for any reason. and the other side says, regardless of the standard, affirm. our pracce is remand. but what outcome could a different standard of proof have on the factual findings in this case? so let me address just sort of the -- i don't think we innded any difference between reversal, we just copied what the court did in the starbucks ca, so we took what you said in your opinion. i don't think the i think the government and we both just think send back. in terms of -- >> well, i don't disagree. just for a moment, i do in the other side says this was harmless. so i dot ink we should get into that. the court below should. but i'm asking u why isn't it harmless error? >> right, yeah. so we think ers more than ample eviden for the court to find and llfind below by preponderance of the idce, and the main reason and e regulation is cited at ge 43-a, that whether urprimary duty is one of maki sales, it's not the time spent but the mo important, ie, the character and time spend is one factor but not dis

that relationship raised questions of judgment. are now, thanks to this astonishing case, questions of judgment let's talk to charlotte gallagher, who's at windsor. prince andrew may not be a working royal, but still hugely embarrassing for the royalfamily? it is, and i think if the royal family thought that prince andrew stepping back from public life would mean an end to the embarrassing headlines, they were wrong. in fact, the suggestion that he may have threatened national security due to his relationship with this man is very damaging, and it raises questions, doesn't it, about his relationships and also his judgment. of course, his reputation was of course, his reputation was shattered when his friendship with the convicted sex offenderjeffrey epstein emerged. he was effectively sacked as a working royal, and he has been cut off financially from the king. and it is possible that his financial situation may have been a weigh in for this alleged spy' been a weigh in for this alleged spy, because we think he has to find millions

with an agency's judgment. the american people sent us here to do our job, and now it's time for us to pass clear legislation that leaves little interpretation to be abused by bureaucrats. if you allow others, whether they are unelected judges, or unelected bureaucrats, as folks on this side of the aisle have been saying, to make decisions about the implementation of policies, you've abdicated your responsibilities. it doesn't matter which group of these unelected bureaucrats we defer to, it is wrong. write the law tight, and don't grant rule making authority. or as dr. waller says, amend it and refine it. and that way we can improve it and make sure it is being implemented the way we want it. we cannot be lazy legislators and think that laws will be implemented the way that we think or that we hope they will be. and finally, put more people on committees that they are qualified for instead of the committee that they can raise the most money in. because that takes place every single day in this organization, as

i'm not saying, i'm not passing any judgment. i'm only passing judgment on the decisions the state department has taken. and it asking you why, if you haven't answered. >> you mention the diplomatic efforts that we've been engaged in here and u.s. has taken a a leadership role in a number of from the oas -- >> in a very weak man. that's why and who is going like this. we're granting licenses to these people. that's the number one tool we have here do you agree with me? >> we certainly agree that sanctions are important part of our toolkit and that's why we have used then most recent on september 12 as i mentioned, and we are certainly not ruled out additional actions going forward, whether individual or broader sanctions. so speed is a good ask again. you're not asking me, you're not answering and understand your position. were in a democracy. you are not telling you, , you d i give me any information. is there anyway there's a conversation in treasury or in the state department to make a decision, consider the possibility of put

there are now, thanks to this astonishing case, questions of judgment again.of unexplained jones which have been spotted in the skies of newjersey and pennsylvania have residents and lawmakers in the us concern. speaking at a briefing today, the white house national security spokesperson john kirby said the government has no evidence the drone sightings reported pose a national security or public safety threat. ~ . ., . . threat. we have no evidence at this time the _ threat. we have no evidence at this time the reported - threat. we have no evidence at this time the reported drugs i this time the reported drugs that plaza national security or public safety threat or have a four annexes. the department of homeland security in the fbi are investigating the sightings and they are working closely with state and local law enforcement to provide resources using numerous detection methods to better understand their origin. using very sophisticated electronic detection technologies provided by federal authorities, we have not been able to and neither have state or lo

call, it seems to me, but it's one -- you know, it'fficult judgment call as a matter of policy. and then for us to come in -- and this is repeating what i id earlier, but i want your reaction to it -- for us to come in and to choose one side of that, knowing that either way people are going to be harmed, this is re's no kind of perfect way out, at least as i'd the briefs here, where everyone benefits and no one is harmed, right? the -- the -- the -- the difficulty of the issue is some people are going to be harmed? mr. strangio: well -- justice kavanaugh: and then the question becomes, how does the court choose group -- why isn't that a choice for policymakers as best they can to -- to make that choice in the first instance? so i just throw that out there ke your reactions and anything you want to say on that. mr. strangio: okay. so if i could just make a few points in -- in reaction. justice kavanaugh: well, can i add one -- one more point, sorry -- mr. strangiy. justice kavanaugh: -- to add to that. and i don'think, with respect, that what you and the solicitor genera, oh, we'

how do we make those value judgments? are you sayingould never expand the category where we have done clear and convincing or are you saying that this is different in kind from the category where we have a heightened standard? >> to be clear, they'renltwo ways to get there. you have to do it by the constitution which is adding 10 orhe statute. in the 1966 case wre the court said it is left to the jiciary to make a determination about these things but startingith grogan and halo, this court is treate as we look at congressional silence. i have not been able to think of a statutory right where congress has not addressed a burden of proof that involves th depredation le deportation and denationalization but if this court wanted to leave that open, we would not just thro up our hands and do whate nt but more of a background presumption against what congress legislates. congress knows in the 1940's and 1950's they set out a rule that if it was not invoinmoney damages that the court wou read into a clear and convincing evidence

rather than respecting the judgment, rather than investing in cleanup and helping these poor people inven donziger in an unprecedented way and i think it was a terrible injustice. look, this is like the -- this is like a david and goliath story and chevron, you know, used its corporate wealth and its legal connections to target steven donziger and to ignore the contamination it left behind in ecuador. >> let's talk about how they actually targeted donziger. it's somewhat unusual. as you know the pardon power is only available to deal with criminal matters, federal criminal matters. here, though, chevron brought a private civil lawsuit against donziger but he was then subsequently convicted of misdemeanor contempt of court charges. how typical is that? that's the federal crime for which he's been convicted. >> i don't think it's typical at all. i'm not a legal expert but it's high lie unusual and shows the extent that chevron was willing to go to to try to basically avoid paying the judgment that a court decided it owed the people of ecuador. again, i mean, he was -- almost three years

. >> can't rush to judgment in this case or any case, because any one of you all, if you were charged with a crime or any of your family members or loved ones, you wouldn't want anybody rushing to those judgments. >> good evening, i'm greg lee. we'll get to those stories in a moment. but first, we're following some breaking news in oakland. firefighters are on scene of what they're calling a compressed natural gas leak that is forcing evacuations. a live picture here from the scene in the area of second street between market and brush streets. some buildings in the area are being evacuated. you see those fire rigs on scene? all roads are closed in a three block radius from embarcadero west to third street. this is near jack london square. no word yet on what caused the gas leak. as we get new information about this incident, we will bring it to you. now back to the united health care ceo shoing tonight. the man charged with health care remains in jail. luigi mangione ibeing held without bail in pennsylvania and has pleadedot guilty to several charges in the state, includg forgery. the

can you dispute that in almost l stances the judgment at the present time of the health authorities inhe uni kingdom and sweden is that the risks and dangers greatly outweigh the bs/ do you dispute tha >> i do. if you look at how those jurisdictions e dressing this issue, they have not outright banned this care. the ss report says this care can be medicallyicated for some transgendered adolescents. of course it isrue they have called for a more individualized approach and have questioned whether it should be readily applied to all adolescents -- >> is it not true that in england -- i'm sorry to interrupt, time is running out that the national health service somes ago limited the prescription of peabody blockers to adolescent males who are over e of 16 and are already ongen but for those who under the age of 16 it is allowed only for experimental purposes? >> the approach in the u.k. is to allow hormone therapy for anne 16 and older. with respect to puberty blockers, the u.k. restricted new prescriptions outside of research setti the cass implentation plan makes clear edical team determ

i'm not going to make those judgments from here before that group has the opportunity to work through these questions. that's one set up in a first-place so he so it could do so in a diligently and that's with the going to do. but that said, we believe that it is an interest of israel and lebanon that the ceasefire hold. remember, if you look at from it shows perspective, the 70,000 israeli citizens that have been forced from their homes don't get to return home if the ceasefire collapses. it is very much in israel interest to see the ceasefire hold and will continue to press and do it to adhere to it. >> will the be additional consequences from u.s. if israel -- >> i'm not going to get into hypotheticals. go ahead. >> shortly after the ceasefire was announced the uae national outlet published what it said was a ceasefire agreement. was that i could? >> i'm not going to speak to the publicly. we often see outlets report on various documents sometimes her final drafts, sometimes that address along the way but i'm not going to convert. >> is it not in the public interest to make sure ev

that judgment said jason killed his wife.does not mean the facts alleged in the civil complaint are true. it does not mean he's guilty. and the judge, at the criminal trial, told the jury that in his instructions. however, when you hear the statement, jason young brutally murdered his wife, but that doesn't mean he's guilty, folks, hello, you know? keith morrison (voiceover): and the prosecutor made sure the jury heard just who signed that ruling. howard cummings: --a reading from this document, which was signed, actually, by judge stephens. keith morrison (voiceover): judge stephens-- the very judge sitting before them in this trial. beth karas: the jury hearing that, it's just something that's going to carry a lot of weight. this is the complaint that was filed in december, seeking custody of cassidy. keith morrison (voiceover): prosecutors also called the attorney involved in that custody case over daughter cassidy. and those same allegations were repeated yet again. beth karas: the jury heard several times through these t

call it seems to me, it's one that is -- a difficult judgment call as matter of policy. and then for us to come in, this is repeating what i said earlier, but i want your reaction to it, for us to come in and to choose one side of that, knowing either way, peare going to be harmed. there's no kind of perfect y out, at least as i've read the briefs here where everyone benefits and no one is harmed. that the difficulty of the issue is some people are going to be harmed, and then the question becomes, how does the court choose which group? why isn't that a choice for policymakers as best they can to instance?ce in the first so i just throw that there and take yoreactions and anything you want to say that. >> i can th a few points. >> i have one point to add to that. i don't think with respect that what yosaid, we'll just send it back to the district court and they'll make fact findings. we'll be back here in a ye with the same disc. go ahead. >> a few pojustice kavanaugh. i see the role of the cour is assessing whether thchoice that tennessee made is one that they can justi

i am not passing any judgment. only passing judgment on the decisions state department has taken. and i am asking you, why? and you haven't answered. >> you mentioned the diplomatic efforts that we have been engaged in, and u.s. has taken a leadership role in a number of -- >> in a very weak manner. that is why it is going like that. and we are granting licenses to these people. that is the number one tool we have. do you agree with me? >> we certainly agree that sanctions are an important part of our toolkit, and that is why we have used the most recently on september 12th, as i mentioned, and we certainly have not ruled out additional actions going forward, whether individual or broader sanctioned. >> all right, so, i'm going to ask again -- you are not answering, and i understand your position, we are in a democracy, you are not telling me, you are not giving me any information. is there any way that there is a conversation in treasury or in the state department, to make a decision, consider the possibility of p

i trust his judgment. i know you worked with him as a u.s. attorney and also in a law firm that was formed after you both left the justice department and his view of you, which he shared with me personally, as well as in this letter is significant. we've had a chance to visit about your work on the house intelligence committee and i particularly appreciated your last comment about the importance of being fully open and an oversight committee like this one being fully informed. >> we'll return to our marathon of trump nominees in their own word. right now fulfill our 45-year commitment, gavel to gavel coverage of the u.s. senate which is meeting this morning for a brief session.

somebody knows something or know someone that said something that can help bring this person to judgmentand we're just hoping that someone will say, you know what? i've been carrying this and i know exactly who did this to help angie and the birbiglia family are putting up billboards to remind the community they need answers for this violent murder. a lot of people in this area have never heard of amber's case until most recently, but until there is a break in the case, amanda holds on to faded pictures of her beloved sister, taken much too soon. >> i was about seven and she was about five here and we were getting ready to go to the pool with our colored sunscreen on our faces. >> if you have any information regarding amber birbiglia's murder, her family asks that you contact crime stoppers south carolina at one 888 crime sc or you can call the true crime news tip line at (888) 845-7555. when we come back, she zipped up her boyfriend in a suitcase and recorded him as he died. sarah boone, the convicted suitcase killer, will be lked up for life. we have the latest next. >> no one is ever

know there are media lawyers who felt that case was winnable but it was settled out of court for a judgment. $16 million. that is unfortunate. again, it is a matter of interpretation whether that was 100% accurate or not. that is the kind of thing that would have been adjudicated if the case had gone further. ♪

but we can't rush to judgment. um what's been interesting to me are these old cold cases that have been solved using uh, familial genealogy research uh, the suspect is eventually arrested, and charged, has come out of left field. no, nobody. he was on no one's radar for 40 years. 30 years? um bingo. they find him so i don't know. and i don't want to rush to judgment on people that i think are interesting joe berlinger i think of a woman named cece moore who's been a guest of mine on this program. >> she's a genetic detective. are you optimistic that retesting of the dna? there is dna in this case that was found at the crime scene might finally resolve it. and what is happening if we know with that dna. >> well there is dna evidence that we think should be retested. >> whether that leads to the killer or not, who's who's to say? >> but as john just mentioned, genetic genealogy, csi, you know has been terrific at that. >> and that technology has led to the solving of the green river killer, the golden state killer, a

that's a judgment, a legal judgment overrule. so i think on those two bases, i think it's a questionable decision. and, you know, she's right. that is fani willis to appeal it to the next court, which is the supreme court, of course, of georgia. >> all right. we'll see if they take it or what the decision might be rendered. in that case. all right. i want to shift gears now and also talk to you about another big case in the past couple of weeks. luigi mangione he is the suspect in the killing of the health care ceo. he could be arraigned as early as monday. he's facing a slew of new charges in the killing of brian thompson. mangione has 11 charges in new york, including first degree murder as an act of terrorism. he's also facing federal charges now and actually being held in federal custody. so what do you make of the prioritizing of these cases? the new york and federal case you know, so they there will be certainly discussions and negotiations between federal authorities and state authorities as to who goes first. >> and that

and we have a right to pass judgment on your hypocrisy.about the great winston churchill, one of my great, great heros. he drank in the morning, afternoon and night but he wasn't a drunk. he could handle his booze but he drank. that didn't stop him from being one of the greatest statesmen of u.s. history. grant, well-known drinker. his detractors, many jealous of him would bring it up to lincoln all of the time and lincoln would say well, send him another bottle of vodka because he's winning a war, that's what mattered. what about benjamin franklin, old benjamin, can you believe when benjamin in franklin was in france he was a womeninezer. certainly nothing to do with the truth, the usual suspects are out there, the usual media outlets are out there, reporters are out there i think to their number, they do a number on certain politicians and not on others, certain nominees and not on others. i can tell you this about pete hegseth, stand-up guy, whatever may or may not have happened in the past doesn't happen now. people go through ugly div

, but that we subje judgments about these issues to a heighte review to ensure those children who are going to suffer these uences will be made to do so only when it is compelling and necessary. unregulated entirely access to these treatments, in all other pediatric context where there is a similar risk-benefit tradof for the families affected, these are difficult decisions. anytime you inking about a medical intervention, you need to weigh risks and ben the state has come in a sharp departure fromt normally addresses this issue and complete decided toverride the views of the parents, the patient's, the doctors grappling with these decisions trying to make those trade-offs. >> i wanted to get your thoughts first on why one should think of this as primarily a sexed base classification. there is another way of looking at a law like this, that it is a classification based on transgender status. in other words, there are trans young people on one sidee line and cis peoplhe other side. both mal female,oth sides of the line. why what is really goinghere -- ierstand the formal ways in whis i

you must be in possession of your natural faculties, ordinary intelligence, sound judgment, and fairand possess a sufficient knowledge of english language. in summary, the candidates should have the capacity to be of fair judgment, investigative skills, and have a commitment to serving the community. they must also be willing to file what we call a form 700. it's a statement of economic interest. and that, as i've already mentioned, the court is focused on building a diverse and inclusive grand jury panel that reflects the population. a range of experiences and knowledge and expertise are also important. the time commitments are varied. there's, on average, 25 hours per week, but the grand jurors work together as a group and set their own hours, set their own tasks that will be assigned, that will be part of their role in the grand jury. and so the recruitment is then taken on--the recruitment process is then taken on by the presiding judge. in this case, our presiding judge, judge emede, will be in charge along with--we have an individual named britney huelbig who's our deputy court

jean carroll's $5 million civil judgment against the president-elect. 2023 a jury found trump liable for sexually abusing carroll in the mid-1990s and then defaming her after she went public with her story. trump attempted to appeal the verdict after what he claimed were unfair rulings from the judge when he took over the trial. he also took issue with the judge's decision to hear the "access hollywood" tape, but the appeals court looked at it, and today it ruled against donald trump. in its ruling the court said, quote, mr. trump has not demonstrated that the district court erred in any of the challenge rulings. further he's not carried his burden to show any claimed error or combination of claimed errors affected his substantial rights as required to warrant a new trial, end quote. joining me now is mary mccord, former acting assistant attorney general for justice department and tim o'brien, executive editor for bloomberg opinion. welcome to both of you. mary, in a statement today from donald trump's team, they have vowed to continue appealing this ca

this goes to the question of judgment, of the judgment of the president elect, who knew very well what these allegations were and didn't care. and in fact probably celebrated them because he himself is a convicted felon. and maybe birds of a feather, i don't know, maybe he wanted company, but the fact of the matter is that he wanted to either say to the american people, these things don't really matter, these values, you know, whatever. or he wanted to pull the wool over the american people's eyes so that they weren't really aware just how serious these allegations were, because let's remember, he wanted to push through this nomination during a recess. he did not even want this to go through the the process, because he probably knew he might have been forced to do that because i think there was a significant amount of opposition to matt gaetz. >> i do want to read has there should be i want to read this response from him today. he says giving funds to someone you're dating that they didn't ask for and that isn't charged for sex is now prostitution? there is there is a reason to me. the

in my judgment, the best vice president anyone has ever had.plause] [cheering] [applause] president carter: i've not achieved all i have set out to do. perhaps no one ever does. but we have faced some tough issues. we have achieved some very important goals for our country. these efforts will not end with this administration. the effort must go on. nor will the progress that we have made be lost when we leave office. the great principles that have guided this nation since its very founding will continue to guide america through the challenges of the future. this has been a long and hard fought campaign, as you all well know. we must now come together as a united and unified people to solve the problems that are still before us. to meet the challenges of a new decade. i urge all of you to join in with me in a sincere and fruitful effort to support my successor when he undertakes this great responsibility as president of the greatest nation on earth. [applause] ours is a special country. our influence will always be greater when we live up to the

, and the dni sort of puts the thumb on the judgment in the end and says, mr.i think this is a five-alarm fire or really not a big deal. and the carriage is that the dni comes in -- the danger is that the dni underestimates threats or overestimates them, and that's where you immediate that disinterested view. -- you need that disinterested view. >> and i think it's the underestimation that would be the real problem for gabbard. let me give you a concrete example of how this would work. back when assad was using chemical weapons on his own people, she was so intent on making sure that the united states not be drawn in any way into that conflict that she was delving in the fever swamps and suggesting at one point that the rebel groups might have staged those attacks simply to pull the west and the u.s. into that war. i mean, is this the kind of person you want collating all of that information coming in and presenting it to the president? because the the instincts she has shown has been to minimize those kind of situations, do whatever is necessary to make the ar

you make a relative judgment, number three looks closest to the memory i have in my head.f you are shown photos, one photo, yes or no, another photo, yes or no, you're making individual judgments against the memory in your head. we urge these reforms. the second most instance is unvalidated forensic sight. so many of our cases have involved the introduction of evidence that is inaccurate and unreliable. for example, bite mark evidence. we all remember from the ted bundy death penalty case that there was expert testimony that there were bite marks on the deseedent that was tied to ted bundy's bite pattern. what we've learned over the years is it's not an accurate science. it's not a science at all. studdies have been done that brought together forensic odontologists, dentists, here's a set of teeth or a bruise or a mark. doctors one through 10, tell me if this is a match. what they've found is you can't get the same answer every time. you never get consistency. one time they'll say yes, the next group will say no. that's sort of a hallmark of science, replicability. that's

i have been digesting the judgment which has come down from the district court in the hague in the lastst, the court said it is up to the government itself, the state in principle to assess policy. and only in limited cases should courts, judges, intervene. secondly, there are already measures in place to ensure the netherlands is not supporting violations of international law. it goes into more detail here. the court finds there is no reason to impose a total ban on the export of military and dual use goods. the state has an obligation under international law to assess on a case—by—case basis and essentially the court found that is already happening. the mechanism is three, are already in place an application for export has regularly been refused. on the basis of the checks and balances already in place from the dutch government. and number four, the dutch government. and numberfour, israel has the dutch government. and number four, israel has a the dutch government. and numberfour, israel has a right to protect itself. the court said the state cannot be obliged to announce a full emba

think that's really an important note that providers intelehealth have that independent clinical judgmentat is best for the patient. the fascinating thing for me is, the reason i was going on that -- describing the reduction in price over time, especially with the added scrutiny, is we've all been talking about, how do we get these prices cheaper for patients? the only patients that we're paying a list price for the ones that weren't covered. and the fascinating thing is, three years ago, the list price was $1,300. today, we're announcing an integration with a patient can pay $399. there's two companies in the announcement, not 12. that's why. it's because -- because of this integration, has removed the middleman in that process, removed insurance companies, it's fighting for patients by removing those intermediaries. there might be scrutiny here, but the most important thing to take away is that this is what's best for patients and providers to have independent clinical judgment. >> zach, thank you for coming by. >>> coming up, big tech bringing the nasdaq to new heights. how options tra

the question comes to tulsi's judgment. why did she then go?ffered the same opportunity and said no. she said yes. what is at the route of the suspicion is there's a lack of trust. they don't trust her judgment, her answers, can she overcome that, we'll see. >> do you know what happened or what her -- if there was a change in her might have happened when she was over there? >> no, the issue was the meeting with assad. and that's where all members of congress said, no, we're not doing that. she said, yes, we will do that. i think that speaks to her judgment, raises real questions in a confirmation hearing. >> there's also a question of if one of these or more, i suppose you could say, if one of these picks doesn't make it, who would they be replaced with. the "wall street journal" reports, for example, that tucker carlson and donald trump jr. led a campaign to prevent mike pompeo from becoming the next defense secretary. it does raise the question, who would have donald trump's ear? >> let's not forget about the fact that the trump operation isn

and while there is uncertainty about the prince's finances, it is his judgment that has once again comentroversy has been banned from the uk following a judgment by the uk's semi—secret national security court. he's known only as h6, and has not been named . the home secretary yvette cooper said there are no plans to change this. we always respect the decisions of the court and don't comment on individual cases. it can be clear that wherever our intelligence and security agencies find cases said pose any kind of challenge or threat to uk national security, be that around foreign influence, espionage or any other kind of security threat, we will always stand ready to take action. syrians rejoiced late into the night on friday to celebrate their new found freedoms five days after a lightning rebel advance ended over 50 years of rule under the assad family. thousands of people packed into the main square in damascus setting off fireworks, sounding their car horns, and waving a new nationalflag — that of the rebel forces. in aleppo, residents danced in the streets and set fire to a huge bil

and while there is uncertainty about the prince's finances, it is his judgment that has once again come, bbc news. from buckginham palace — our reporter graham satchell has more on the growing number of questions around this case. there are a growing number of questions, i think particularly about prince andrew whose connections, his contact, his judgment and his finances. we know that because he is no longer a working royal, that he is not getting paid on the way that he used to, but his outgoings are said to be absolutely enormous. he has a 30—room mansion in windsor, has been a concern that he will have been vulnerable to influence and interference from wealthy people or states who may not have his best interests or the nation's best interest at heart. and more broadly, that if the times is right and this alleged spy had access to buckingham palace, and i should say that the palace are not commenting on that the moment, then there is a concern about how far has chinese intelligence infiltrated the broader british establishment. this morning, the former security minister tom tugendhat