know,lch institute, as we is devoted to the rule of law, and the will of law -- the rule of law is a rich and complex concept. by term is used and misused many people for variety of reason, but it includes a message written on the outside of the supreme court building, and that is "equal justice under law." systeme of law means a in which disputes are decided based on the law and not based on the mood of the person who happens to be deciding that dispute at a particular time. it means a system in which disputes are decided based on goals that are written down and publicly known, and perhaps most importantly, it means a system in which disputes are decided fairly. they are not decided based on political influence or family connections, or wealth, or social class, or ideology, or discrimination on any ground. it is an important concept, a vital concept for us here in the united states, and for other countries around the world. and we know why it is important. they know it is important for economic reasons. this is something, even autocrats can understand. adherencen shown that to the r

constitutional law? >> well, i think, your honor and this court may still recognize it reasonably under the fourth amendment as a form of consent or if this court doesn't wish to do that as a reasonable condition of drive zmrg we normally take state law as it's given to us. we're not great inter preters. we normally defer to state authorities and assess how it proceeds under the federal constitution. if we're not sure what the state law is here, what are we supposed to do here? >> well, i'd say a majority of our court has recognized that a blood draw from an unconscious person is a reasonable search and there -- at the wisconsin supreme court there was discussion of both consent and search incident to arrest as i mentioned. i think there's sufficient evidence for this court to affirm it as reasonable. if this court disagree and in some way the wisconsin supreme court hasn't provided that clarity, this court could remand for further clarity. >> how do we remand for further clarity -- there's certification

is the law.reaking the law, and it has been breaking -- doing something like this has been breaking the law since our founding. and i mean, what i find particularly astonishing, nothinging is fully surprising anymore but that the fbi director who has a unit that has been focused on this over the last two years just stays silent because he wants to keep his job or some other self-interested motivation? i think that's what's happening is that people are deeply fearful that we have a lawless administration, and it is increasing the pressure on impeachment. i think the issue here is really the president himself by basically announcing that he is willing to partake in a crime i think most americans think when you announce you're willing to partake in a crime, that is criminal behavior that should be sanctioned. >> ron klain, we need a normalcy reset from you tonight. i may be the only one who has your entire endless resume memorized including your service in the justice department, in of the office of

the law. historians generally debate the end of reconstruction and they say that it ends with the election of hayes. the withdrawal of the few remaining federal troops from the south. reconstruction ends when equality before the law was cut off by violent coup d'etat and by rulings of the supreme court that allowed for horrific discrimination and mayhem. reconstruction inns when the gains of freedom for african-americans during reconstruction were legally undone by the supreme court. the ultimate rejection of african-american rights granted by the 15th amendment was the supreme court's approval in williams v mississippi in 1898 of the 1890 different fries spent -- disenfranchisement conventions. states of the confederacy instituted all sorts of voting restrictions. we know about a lot of them there is the outrageous oklahoma . there is the outrageous oklahoma case where we will allow black people to vote but we won't count the votes. the united states government accepted jim crow but african-a

the fact that the president doesn't know the law, misstates 9 law and violates the law is not going to help pim. what's going to help him is existing department of justice policy which says you can't indict a sitting president. in an odd way, we have the president telling the truth. i would take it, i would be the call the fbi and everybody does it. i don't know about that last part. i don't think everybody does it. but the first two parts i would take it, there's nothing wrong with it, really is a window on to his soul. >> joining our discussioning is democratic congressman is raja krishnamoorthi. adding her voice to our discussion is jennifer rueben at "the washington post" and msnbc contributor. congressman, i want your reaction to what the president said today. he said i think i'd take it. what he was talking about was help from a foreign power or a foreign national to win re-election. >> it was astonishing. i movie, he contradicted not only his fbi director but today in our intelligence hearing even fox contributor andrew mccarthy said he wouldn't take such a meeting with a hostil

but this is about the law, the rule of law. does the hatch act mean anything, are we going to follow the rule of law, are we going to discard it. that's the core question here. these are blatant and repeated examples. this is not a close case. so, you know, i know there's a prevailing attitude and i could suggest where it comes from where some people in the administration don't believe the law applies to them. we see that repeatedly. congress has responsibility to conduct oversight. we have a request outstanding. miss conway knew very well about it. she decided not to come. it is another slap in the face to the rule of law and to this body of which you are part. now, you can make excuses why you're not doing your job but they're not valid excuses. i'm talking to the whole committee. i'm talking to the whole committee. we have a responsibility to conduct oversight. you can make an excuse and say it is not a valid subpoena, it is not necessary. we asked her to come, she didn't come. we have repeated attempts by various parts of o

to international law enforcement.ay, you join the ranks of 50,000 graduates from more than 170 countries. to put that in perspective, there are tens of thousands of those yellow bricks on desks and bookcases across the country and around the world. tens of thousands of bricks that have helped us pave the way for global law enforcement cooperation. that cooperation begins here but it cannot end here. your bricks do not just represent a challenge, they themselves are a challenge, a challenge to build on this foundation after you leave the academy, a challenge to stay in touch and continue helping each other throughout the rest of your careers. so, this session's ending, but your work is far from done. it is up to you to ensure that the network you see in this auditorium grows larger and stronger and that the yellow brick road becomes longer and wider. we all know that your jobs are far from easy. today you have more than 250 new partners standing by to help you in any way they can. that bond of trust, and teamwork repre

colombian law were. and we certainly don't want to have to file, as the government -- >> why not? in civil cases all the time, right? -- we won't enforce judgments that are shams. enforcement judgments when they are different elements. jements when ce jeopardy equivalent hasn't attached. why is it that civil defendants, corporations, business people, this rule butt of not criminal defendants, the least among us? >> there is privity among the parties. they had a reason to forgive the got ct where the rebels amnesty, but that reason doesn't apply to the federal government. thing we can't do -- >> there was never any trial never in were jeopardy? >> your honor, i'm not sure how the proceedings with the proceedings everyone in colombia i can give you other examples but to finish this up. ask the solution is to federal government to make a filing in u.s. district court respecthat court not to the judgment of a colombian court. with e can't do that respect to colombian courts or italian courts without creating

the courts are to say what the law is, not what the law should be. it is there to provide a retrospective view rather than perspective view. what has been done with the law rather than where the law should go or will go in the future. w >> when judges use that appointment, immunity from the political process as an excuse to engage in lawmaking, that is really bad. the federalist number 78 talks replace,s when you which is exercised by the politicalis branches, with judgment, you leave them in a form of tierney. >> it's important for people to remember mosthe dangerous is not judiciary. no matter what the judiciary is limited in deciding what the most dangerous branch by far is congress. it's made itself even more dangerous by refusing to exercise of power. danger still has to be addressed everywhere in our system and if someone abuses that power within the federal judicial system, there are certain recourses, got a good litigation system in our country, a judge can overturned on appeal. in theory, it's not exercise very often but the process still ca

we know what the law is. we want to comply with the law. everybody up here favored the law. he would have favored a law that was more ex-pansive, and i think other people would have, too. don't accuse us of being criminals. next item, please. >> clerk: line item 7, public comment on item listed below, closed session, including whether to hold closed session. >> president hirsch: all right. any public comment on closed session? all right. seeing none, public comment is closed. next item. >> clerk: item 8, closed session. >> president hirsch: is there a motion? >> motion. >> president hirsch: is there a second? >> second. >> president hirsch: okay. there's a motion and a second. all in favor? opposed. okay. the motion passes. we're going into closed session. . >> i love that i was in four plus years a a rent control tenant, and it might be normal because the tenant will -- for the longest, i was applying for b.m.r. rental, but i would be in the lottery and never be like 307 or 310. i pretty much had kind of given up on that, and had to leave san francisco. i found out about th

no one is above the law. everyone will be held accountable, including the president of the united states. the people's house will continue to fight to make the truth known for the american people and will defend congress' role under article 1. i urge a strong bipartisan vote for this resolution to hold attorney general barr and former white house counsel mcgahn in civil contempt for their refusal to comply with congress' subpoenas and honor the oath of office that they take. with that i urge an aye vote and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the speaker yields back her time. the gentlewoman from arizona is now recognized. mrs. lesko: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield two minutes to the representative from california, mr. mcclintock. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcclintock: thank you, mr. speaker. you know, there's a reason for the abuse -- abusive rhetoric from the left. for 2 1/2 years they peddled a monstrous lie that donald trump is a traitor, colluding w

law is supposed. to russian segment of the sea everyone should be able to work you both need to log . government institutions. and think you for the invitation by the way. and i will put this. down to. the people of donbass have been waiting for using the procedure for getting citizenship for. people of. all around russia. and now we go to all correspondence. with the city of now but. we are. ok i will just leave that for now we've been listening to a question answer session just coming up on 3 hours now with president putin feeling questions from all across russia we'll be back in a moment giving you the highlights of that and of course much more because he's still going this is r.t. international. we came here where did you work before you came here when you live. in many us states capital punishment is still practiced convicted prisoners can spend years waiting for execution but most of the time the victims' families they are very much in favor of the death penalty there are some people because of

which is federal law as well as international law recognizes that asylum seekers i.e. refugees are going to sometimes be forced to enter a country through irregular means and because they are fleeing persecution i would also just note that while presenting oneself to a customs and border protection officer at a port of entry is the legal way to apply for asylum c.b.p. officers have been turning asylum seekers away from the ports of entry by the thousands for several years now and so an absence the federal government creates the illegality of which it complains about and then seeks to create inhumane policies to control that illegality if we could have a federal law enforcement that would take their oath seriously and up hold all federal law including the laws that they don't agree with such as processing asylum seekers then we might face less border crossings at irregular points i want to bring into the conversation the vice president mike pence he was speaking a week ago about illegal crossings on the u.s. border have a listen to him. as president trouble is made clea

i have also learned about the law and how the law works as opposed to how i saw the law function. you heard a little bit of that today. it's not necessarily about justice. it's no wonder that randall is upset with the constitutional system we have now, if you think it should be about justice. my attorneys working for the minority client, and they put my evidence, sort of like one attorney says i lay down the hay so the goats can get at it. in the opposing attorney goes after me. it become sort of symbolic as well if you have ever been on the stand of been the subject of a cross examination. they attacked my testimony, my credentials, my deposition, any and everything. i even had one accuse me because i had done voter registration years back, and he said isn't it true you spent most of your time in college working for civil rights. i thought that was not true, i spent most of my time studying or praying. i had to learn a lot about the rules of the court. newspapers cannot be presented as evidence. a historian can present the newspaper as evidence and explain it. probably the most i

could they consider it if congress passed a law? absolutely and that would be within their judicial role. simone: a lot of americans who might not have heard of the judicial crisis network heard from your organization this week are in the democratic debate. you had an ad running on both nights this week. tell us more about what that ad was intended to achieve and how that reflect your political priorities going into 2020. carrie: we all saw during 2016 the significance of trump having a list of judges for the supreme court. a lot of people have pointed to that as a key reason he won in that election. people saw the importance of the supreme court, but this is someone not just giving platitudes and historically, we get someone who is saying it or i want some one who is going to support the constitution and that is vague enough to encompass a wide range of philosophies. in a negative extreme, someone will say i will appoint someone with a particular result. i will vote this -- appoint this way for labor or women or something else. but

it is a question of whether they owe bade the law -- owe bade the law -- obeyed the law. period. now things are getting worse. in response to the special counsel's report, the white house and ms. conway have gone on the offensive. by arguing that the hatch act esot even apply to her. tell that to all the other federal employees that have to adhere to this law. in a letter to special counsel on jewel 11, the white house counsel claimed there were no violations, quote, even assuming that the hatch act applies to the most senior advisors to the president in the white house, end of quote. similarly, ms. c conway stated this week, quote, it is not ite clear to us at the white counsel, that the hatch act applies to assistance of the president, end of quote. let me make this abundantly clear. the hatch act is absolutely -- absolutely applies to ms. conway. period. it is written in black and white. re the committee on jurisdiction over this law. and neither congress nor the courts have ever suggested that a president's advisors are exempt. finally, i want to address the white house's bal

drug control laws. and unfortunately, the first time we often learn of these new fentanyl-like substances would be through a sudden rash of overdose threats. this called for unprecedented measures. in 2017, the attorney general directed d.e.a. to find a solution. in february of 2018, d.e.a. scheduled the entire class of fentanyl-like substances on a temporary emergency basis. the action, this gap has been filled. in response to the class-wide scheduling order we have seen a significant decrease and reduced production of these substances by traffickers. but d.e.a.'s emergency temporary scheduling order controlling these substances will expire on february 6, 2020, absent further action by congress to make it permanent. f that gap in u.s. law re-emerges, the department expect drug traffickers to take the united states back to even more deadly phases of this epidemic. i can personally tell you how savy they are. when there is a gap in u.s. law, they take full advantage of it, which results in more drugs and

ignore the law."ing is, as long as we comply with the law, that's fine. we are amoral, we have no interest in what's happening. i think it's for governments to determine what is right and wrong. that is their sovereign — their sovereign duty. you make money out of it. we are a commercial organisation. right, you would. can i have an answer to my question? my answer to the question is the same as it was earlier. is it fair to compare you to them? i don't know the circumstances around them. this weekend saw large protests in hong kong against a controversial extradition bill which would allow suspected criminals to be sent to mainland china for trial. britain handed the territory back to china back in 1997, but agreed that hong kong would remain semi—autonomous for at least 50 years, under a joint declaration lodged with the united nations. mps have been debating whether the new law might be seized upon by china to target political opponents in the territory. yesterday's huge protest march, peaceful rig

this is deja vu news live from berlin botswana's high court strikes down laws against homosexuality the ruling is received with the jubilation in the courtroom it goes against the trend in other parts of sub-saharan africa work anti-gay laws have been retained we'll go back to government also coming out as the international labor organization marks its centenary we look at it afterwards to bring dignity to work and how the drive for the lowest possible cost can lead to harsh conditions and exploitation. and the true scope that sank in budapest is raised from the river down for more bodies have been recovered after the worst disaster on the river and a century. plus day 4 of the women's world cup gives fans a 1st look at the united states team after neighbors and rivals canada survive a scare from cameroon to get their turn off the world winning start. i'm sumi so much kind of good to have you with us botswana's high court has overturned a colonial era law criminalizing gay sex now the ruling makes the country a pioneer in sub-saharan africa where most countries still enforce laws agains

well, what i'm telling you is as a government official, as a law enforcement person, i don't think lawl state feel the same way. tudge firearms rules in america, evenif tudge firearms rules in america, even if it is today guns from those in mental crises and to stop people getting killed, and you are sure to arouse strong feelings and angry resistance. will, bbc news in colorado. —— aleem maqbool. resistance. will, bbc news in colorado. -- aleem maqbool. sounds at lael, tell us what is planned for today. we can see hong kong is beginning to come to life, still very early in the morning, of course. indeed it is and you can see of course people trying to get to work. there is a bit of confusion around here as we've been reporting. thousands of people strong in the streets over the last few days, and they've left evidence of it behind me. you can see the rubbers powered up. a little earlier, lots of police drugs, garbage trucks trying to clea n drugs, garbage trucks trying to clean this up. i'm not far away from the legislative council complex with some of the really violent clashes took

the law but. boy oh boy. oh boy. you got. it's $29.00 team couple american football field it is closing in south america and this is close just brazil the pressure is on the plane. you're a glutton another victory comes with. the flow began to play down more. than 60 minutes on g.w. . early the global tourist guide flamini capital i love for lent that's the scope of the multicultural metropolis you know you're a back series simpler than it sounds like me i love peter munch and once a day sits and looks like swiss like me by the sleeve 50 missions 50 stories. and 50 fairly personal tips on berlin's very best features. currently called t w. e take it personally. with a little bit wonderful people and stories that make the game so special. for all true for. more than football online is going to. help my managers to know who to day. you know the banks and why and so was the language of i'm. speaking the truth global news that matters g.w. made for minds. this is the doctor coming up in the program it's the no one wants northweste

law journal. we found out yesterday that tony is stepping down from full-time coverage of the supreme court that he's been doing since 1979. a career of great service and friendship for all of us involved. i'd like to ask for a round of applause to tony for that. [ applause ] beth is a friend of mine and distinguished supreme court practitioner. many are recovering from yesterday and still trying to digest today's recordorder list didn't feel like they could commit to be here. he was the head of the appellate civil decision in the obama administration and she's practiced for more than two decades at the supreme court. she has 25 supreme court arguments. she has some knowledge to bring to the floor. with those introductions, i want to do this conversationally. i may throw one question at a person but please feel free to weigh in. we had a year this year where justice kennedy was replaced by a new nominee, just kavanaugh who went through some of you may remember this far back, a rather seering confi

as indicated the texas legislature passed a new butter id law, senate bill five that is a law in texas and has not been challenged. >> the keeper clarified the record, it is important today. could you walk us through how a generic case of the voting rights act, in other words what steps would they proceed? >> yes representative i would be happy to do that. that raises an important point that section two and section three of the voting rights act remain fully intact notwithstanding the supreme court decision in shelby county. i believe all the witnesses before the subcommittee today agree on that point. when somebody believes the victim of potential discrimination they can bring action under the voting rights act section two. if indeed the said conditions are those that resemble the conditions in 1965 that justified preclearance in the first place, section 3c provides a remedy to address that called the build process. the building process is a targeted form of required and big can be set for certain amount of time can cover certain areas, a surgical ability to impose a preclearance regi

but this is about the law, the rule of law. does the hatch act mean anything, are we going to follow the rule of law, are we going to discard it. that's the core question here. these are blatant and repeated examples. this is not a close case. so, you know, i know there's a prevailing attitude and i could suggest where it comes from where some people in the administration don't believe the law applies to them. we see that repeatedly. congress has responsibility to conduct oversight. we have a request outstanding. miss conway knew very well about it. she decided not to come. it is another slap in the face to the rule of law and to this body of which you are part. now, you can make excuses why you're not doing your job but they're not valid excuses. i'm talking to the whole committee. i'm talking to the whole committee. we have a responsibility to conduct oversight. you can make an excuse and say it is not a valid subpoena, it is not necessary. we asked her to come, she didn't come. we have repeated attempts by various parts of o

in a turnaround it's those law enforcement agencies that are now coming under scrutiny . the interior ministry has opened an investigation into the officers who arrested called enough and they've asked president putin to fire 2 senior moscow police officials. and for more let me join emily's show when as you. and each of you know why good to know was suddenly set free on tuesday. well i think i'm right it was a bit of a mix on the on the one hand you have the fact that the evidence from the beginning was rather shaky to say the least. we just heard that police published 9 photos that apparently showed some some something like a drugs. apartment later they that admitted that actually 8 of those photos were taken in governance apartment yesterday the interior minister announced that d.n.a. had actually not been found on the drugs packets so that's all rather paul problematic and then there was also the huge public pressure surrounding the case including the protests including the media solidarity and actually also high ranking politicians were coming out in the past few day

to be above the law. >> no one is above the law.ot even the president of the united states. [cheers and applause] the law," they thunder, except, of course, for the more than 20 million foreign nationals currently living in our country illegally, all under the care and the protection of the democratic party. t they are, by definition, above the law. we can't punish them, democrats tell us. that would be racist.ug drug dealers, too. they're suddenly above the law as well. according to the left. so are people who defecate on sidewalks and people who spray paint overpasses and shoot up in subway stations and leave dirty needles in park. all crimes no longer allowed to acknowledge as crimes. huge classes of people who are literally above the law. and this category is growinghi thanks to the activist left. just last night in the state of virginia, prosecutors backed by george soros unseated incumbents in two large counties outside of washington, d.c. both candidates have pledged to roll back criminal enforcement in a massive way. they wi

the daca cases basically have that law. the government said we are rescinding daca because it is illegal, the court said we don't think it is illegal, we're going to hold it arbitrary, capricious. if the court grants it, it seems like one of the most likely things they do, say that idea that daca is illegal is right. against the background of the census case, you're going to grant, i think there's a good chance the supreme court may agree with the trump administration's interpretation of the underlying statute. >> so questions. let's start with any of the other reporters and then move on. do we have the micro >> hi, i'm with the online news site, who, what, why. forgive me for not knowing the name of the case, so important for reporters, freedom of information act. a concerned grocery manufactu manufacturing and they're right to keep confident business information without really having a good reason. i wondered if you all -- or any of you would like to comment on the implications of that decision? >> so, this is not necessa

law. i introduced this congress tries to we can make clear no one is en the he law not ev president of the united states. let's do right by the american gentle lady from arizona is recognized. u, mr. speaker. >> thank you. opposition of house resolution 430. it's disappointing we're debating a measure that will no impacts. instead fixing pressing issues, the democrats continue their the 2020 nfluencing expense, at taxpayer democrats claimed the president the ded to interfere in 2016 presidential election. 22 months, 40 fbi agents are spending $35 million special concluded there is no collusion between president trump and russia. im with ot charge h obstruction. my colleagues continue to ermine the und president of the united states because all i can think of is that they haven't accepted the he won the election. it's clear to me they're trying to influence the election. americans are real problems and tackling d should be instead. n may, the u.s. border patrol apprehended aaugh dropping 13

one is by a system of fundamental law. standing above the elected legislature and enforced by judges. the other so representative politics. which creates a class of professional politicians with an interest in softening extremes in order to broaden their electoral appeal. representative politics is a very imperfect mechanism for achieving this. but in the long run, political constraints on the power of majorities are likely to be a great deal more effective than legal ones. why do we believe in democracy? or think we do? what are the proper limits of democratic choice? what rights ought a democratic constitution protect, even against the will of the people? when the british argue about these questions as they often do, they generally look to the united states. sometimes as an inspiration, sometimes as a warning. yet in spite of a class similarity of political outlook, the american constitutional tradition is the polar opposite of the british one. at its most basic level, the difference is between two models of the state. a

botswana's high court overturned a colonial era law criminalizing gay sex. it is a landmark case for africa. the court said the law should not regulate private acts between consenting adults and that penalizing people for whom they are is disrespectful. the court unanimously rejected laws which had previously carried a sentence of up to seven years in prison. this makes the country a pioneer in sub-saharan africa, where most countries still enforce laws against homosexuality. it comes less than a month after kenya's high court upheld a law makingng homosexuality a crime. to talk about today's decision joined by katkai colanyane-kesupile. you are from b botswanaa, a tras artist and lgbt activists. it's good to h have you on t the show. tell me, w what does t today's ruling mean for peoplple like eu in botswana? kakatkai: one of the things it means to lgbt people is we are to be recognized constitutionally as well as legally. we've had a few legal provisions that have allowed us to exist in the country without any torment. however, there have been three clause

the fbi is not wrong under the law. you cannot take anything of value or anything else from a foreign governmentful that's the law. democrats have argued that based on what happened last time around trump's associates, they want to go further and have reports of these offers be required. democrats unsparing in their criticism. >> yesterday the president gave us evidence once again that he does not know right from wrong. >> that's shocking. shocking. >> clearly, the president has either learned nothing from the last two years or picked up exactly the wrong lesson. >> so up until this moment about, three minutes into the newscast, this is all a similar story that you've seen before. donald trump says something outrageous, potentially illegal, maybe about russia, and there is this from democrats. what is different tonight, a, he went further. b, there are still some lines that will get you in trouble and c, he'll be in full damage control on this. what's different is what you're about to see which is republicans, including

laws and state a.d.u. laws. one of the things and thinking about a conversations -- the conversations that we have had over the last number of years since i have been involved, i am relatively certain that no one has had more conversations in this room then a supervisor peskin, it is something that they have been very active with for a very long time. the speed at which we do things, considering the magnitude of the emergency that we are facing in the state right now, even in these cleanup spaces of legislation, i feel like this is the sixth or seventh or eighth time i've spoken to this body about it, so however we intend to act to avoid these consequences is really good. thank you to the continued effort of everyone up here, hopefully we will get these people into new homes so people have places to live. thank you. >> next speaker. >> hi, renee, i 25 year resident of san francisco. i am a tenant advocate and a tenant myself in the building with a.d.u.s. i strongly urge you guys to adopt the amendment regarding

the proposed new law, he says, is a major breach by china.nk it's the most serious challenge to the autonomy of hong kong and to the rule of law in hong kong since we left in 1997, and it flatly goes against all the promises that were made about guaranteeing hong kong's local autonomy. but the sheer scale of protest may not be enough. although opposition to the bill has united businesspeople, often pro—establishment, with lawyers, students and shopkeepers, it seems unlikely that china is ready to give ground. james robbins, bbc news. let's get some reaction now from our correspondent in beijing, stephen mcdonell. stephen, still no official reaction from china. presumably they are watching this very closely indeed, but we are hearing from chinese newspapers on what they think of this. yes, well, at least one english—language chinese newspaper has editorialised that foreign forces are behind this. i mean, often you get the english language end of the communist party's press commenting on things, because it kind of seems too ridiculous for them

bruce: antitrust law enforcement is law enforcement. at a specific set of laws and we enforce those laws. those laws dollars to protect competition. conduct that is anticompetitive, mergers that hurt competition. we are not price regulators, speech regulators, we don't regulate speech. we look for competition. david: you have set up a specific task force to look at what is going on at the any trust lawf and technology. the ftc has been having a series of meetings. there must be a reason for you to ask the question, does our traditional approach to antitrust law apply in a world affect?s say, network bruce: let me give you some historical context. network affect was a huge issue in the 1990's. you might remember there was a tremendous amount of fury in the antitrust space, saying we had big numbers in these industries, should we rethink what we do? true whenhing is telecommunication started getting deregulated, even railroads, going back to the sherman act. antitrust hasngs a history of doing is taking these broad commands we have in ant

change the laws. stop vilifying the law-enforcement agency responsible for carrying out the laws. they need to start looking at their own issues and why they are not doing what needs to be done to safeguard this country. lou: and of course enforcing those laws is counter to everything that the chamber of commerce stands for. which is cheap labor and wide open borders, irrespective of the harm it does. the working men and women, small business in this country. the ignorance of the chamber and the koch brothers. it is palpable and it is propelling. obviously, the interest of both the republican democratic rino establishments. >> lou, it's a great point and these migrants are coming here and they have two pay money to take this trip with a cartel, a billion-dollar industry, the individuals coming here, their exploitation doesn't stop at the border. once they get in the united states, they continue to be exploited. whether it's from sexual exploitation, whether it is being forced to take jobs at a lower w

hungrily lawmakers have delayed a 2nd round of debate on the controversial extradition law after tens of thousands of protest surrounding the city's government had cortez demonstrators had been voicing outrage over the bill which would allow hong kong to extradite people to mainland china this is such a rule would allow beijing to pursue political opponents in hong kong the territories legislative council had been set to begin a fresh round on of debate on the bill today we could i do final passage later this month. the today's rallies come after mass protests on sunday that so hundreds of thousands take to the streets against the law many people kept vigil through the night outside the legislative council as lawmakers the getting set to bring up the law again for consideration. before today's demonstrations got underway protesters had been pouring on the pressure overnight. many camped out near the legislative council they wanted to make sure their outrage over the territories contentious extradition law could be heard loud and clear for people have come here to the premises around t

you guys break the law nonstop and claim you're in favor of the rule of law. >> really?e mouth of someone that can't get over the 2016 election who ignores the mass violation and criminal activity of the obama administration, the warrant used to spy on the trump campaign, the perjury of andy mccain. the guest you had on. you ignore the obama administration. and can't get over the 2016 election. >> deflection. >> you completely ignore the obama administration and you can't get over the 2016 so you say criminal cartel with no facts and baseless accusations. >> i told you the facts. >> we have three law degrees here. you can push back and say everybody is bad. why only pick on us. the problem is that you represent the current administration and you want to talk about andrew mccabe, i just had him on fine. those are allegations. he denies them. i know you would respect that because you say it all the time about this president. allegations made about him. and he denies them. that takes us to the next topic. what he said he would be okay doing all three of us know you're not s

and then to pass laws about it. with respect to gay bars, the laws they passed were that gay people couldn't known agar -- a bar because there was a moral clause in new york city and probably washington, d.c.. so, the mob took it over. the mob opened these places without liquor licenses, and paid off the cops. so, you have an underground economy of bars serving gay people. they are overcharging them, gouging them. then you have the cops coming in and busting it because the mob is not paying off on time or right or let's just shake up some gay people. all of that comes out of the laws that were passed by the public. by the voters that voted in the politicians that passed the laws. then, you have the police force that treats groups differently than white generally cops as the other. if you are black, brown, or especially if you are gay. so, by the time you get that and mix it all together, then you get what has become known as the stonewall riots. the rights mostly that they are talking about is saturday night with tp

everybody's talking about the rule of law here and upholding the rule of law. it's time that you stay consistent with the law, because you do not have the ability to eveven set the regulations for twitter. >> can i answer that now? since i got this action, it's five usc 1212 f which provides the power for osc to provided a advisory opinions. >> advisory opinions are not rules and regulations. they're very different. advisory opinions when it comes to regulations -- i promise you i've done the work. i have the homework. >> i'm just tellinyo what my professional staff who's been doing this for 40 years has told me. >> do you have an advisory opinion for this particular twitter use? do you have an advisory opinion that's out there from your osc? >> i'm sorry. i couldn't hear the beginning. >> do you have an advisory opinion on twitter use from osc? >> we have a social media guidance we've done. but on the conway twitter use, it's not done under that. the conway twitter use was done under the statute. >> isn't it her personal twitter account? >> it is. it is her pe

obviously the entire law enforcement community is behind the. faith groups molesworth. more importantly. steve mnuchin has indicated as such. the treasury and the doj, the fbi will testified i think last week in the senate, they'll speak of the overwhelming need to investigate and have access to corporate beneficial ownership information. in order to keep americans safe. so i think there's a real need where this will happen in the u.s. so i'm looking at the pattern of the uk today, please bear in mind that is just a working but we start from scratch. the uk really has done a lot of the lord work legwork to get the benefits of the register for us. so the minister and ed and mark all described you know the great benefits of law enforcement, but also room for improvement and the problems encountered when setting one up. stop like the data entry field which you wouldn't necessarily think of. so i do encourage if you looking at this, please do reach out to them or me whatever. there is a wealth of information about how this works. and the benefits to give. >>> even more so t

trade laws. that is something some members support and some members are critical of. , you can expect 9% of the time, -- 90% of the time, maybe 100% of the time, decisions.nd up with it is certainly the united we wouldn'tion that block panels. i'm sure the mexicans and canadians feel the same way. disputee a series of settlement processes, but what i think is more helpful is we make the obligations very, very specific. the more general the obligations are, the harder they are to enforce. if you take, for example, the , it isn labor in mexico very precise about what mexico has to do, and mexico did follow that in their own law when they implemented their labor laws. i would say number one, we have a viable dispute settlement process. one that i willing to work with members on and will follow the basic instincts of members to which they want to plus it out, because there is room to do that and i am happy to do that. second, we were far more specific than a lot of these agreements in the past so we