mr. wade. sorry, mr. rafferty. >> i did join the motion.ould make is the possibility that these interviews not be conducted by phone at all. perhaps they could be conducted in person and there could be a combination made, i would think, with the state and with the defense, to conduct these in person as opposed to over the phone. >> and i think in me, the driving consideration is going to be the desire of the grand juror. do they want to come all the way back down here and deal with it or would they rather do it over the phone. >> let me be clear, the state is absolutely opposed to any of this, and ms. young is going to come before the court and tell the court why. i thought that at the outset of the arguments, i thought i was clear before we started to argue in terms of the discovery. he has indicated we hadn't given them anything. i thought it was clear the discovery is here. >> i feel like we keep getting back to discovery. let's save that until the end there. >> those are his arguments, judge. >> right now, we're focusing on grand jurors

i have concern that mr. wade and the other folks on this side don't appreciate their brady obligation. i'm asking the court to order them to produce brady material immediately because they are required to. that's my point, your honor. i'm concerned. i raise it with your honor. >> all right. we have also not received any brady information. there is a lot. we know there is a lot. mr. wade and his team have not sent us one page. that's the record. >> mr. rafr at this -- rafferty. i think in terms of the timing of the motion, the way we try to keep things on track as best we can, that we have the final drop dead date. when they are supposed to have gotten here, everything was supposed to be turned over. at that point if you still don't have it that's when that motion becomes relevant. i'm hoping there is an exchange and dialogue and things can be worked out among attorneys. that's the idea. i note your concerns and see what the state has to say and leave it at that. >> my point is, your honor, there is discovery whic

. >> mr. wade, if you wanted to add anything. >> we have every confidence that the court is capable and qualified to set the trial schedule. we'll adhere to whatever. >> i'm hoping to input any time. all right, and the last thing i would say is obviously seeing the new motions that have come in the door, mr. rafferty might be pleased to hear i will absolutely be hoping for prehearing briefing on the supremacy clause issue and the immunity issue as well. i don't think ms. powell joined on the immunity yet. >> not yet. >> that's all i have. so mr. rafferty. >> thank you. your honor, i have been on this case probably for a month. and on august 30th, shortly after i got into this case, i sent a detailed brady request to the government. those brady obligations as your honor knows are independent of their discovery obligations as it relates to the hard drive. they have a due process obligation to turn over to me favorable information. and i didn't send them some blanket request saying give me everything

so if mr. wade in on that call, then we need to be trusted that we would do the right thing, and i will commit 100% that we will, and these grand jurors have been through a lot, and there has been doxxing and all sorts of thing, and we are professionals and not those sorts of people. >> would you document this in some ways, and have a court reporter or what is the plan? >> we have not talked exactly about the case and a good old irecorder or court reporter or grand jurors that you are not required to do so, and we can tell the grand jurors that we are recording this so that there is no question, and i don't want anyone to incorrectly accuse me or my team to go past what we are allowed to ask, and for my own sake, we will have some sort of recording, and unlike the state of georgia as mr. raferty said, they have an unlimited budget paid for by the good taxpayers of fulton county, we don't. despite what the media said, we don't have an unlimited budget. and unless the court can volunteer your court re

evidence against one is evidence against all and as mr. wade noted to the court, the state's position is whether we have one trial or 19 trials, the evidence is exactly the same. the number of witnesses is the same, and so many of the arguments that are made on the other side evaporate. i want to look at the cases cited by mr. chesebro in his motion. a case where severance was properly denied. it is not a rico case. brown versus the state, another case where severance was properly denied, not a rico case. baker versus the state, severance was properly denied, not a rico case. padget severance properly denied, not a rico case. jones versus the state, severance was properly denied, also not a rico case. sofiro versus the united states, severance was properly denied, that was not a rico case. henderson, which we just received just now, that was also not a rico case. severance was properly denied. mr. chesebro points to a couple of cases in his motion where a conviction was reversed on appeal, and as the court pointed out, in those cases, what the

. >> thank you, mr. wade for mr. chesbro, who is the lead council? >> my name is scott grubman. am representing mr. chesbro. >> have you received expressive authority to waived your clients presents today? all right. who do we have for ms. powell. >> i am manny arora on behalf of sidney powell. >> all right, just a few preliminary thoughts. to be clear, the scheduling order we entered from mr. chesbro earlier last week, did not contain any kind of a ruling on severance. so the plan would be to try to resolve as many of these issues as we can this week and to begin entering scheduling orders for the remaining defendants by either the end of this week or early next week. so with that, is there anything else we should take up for diving into argument, mr. wade? >> the quartet -- the state to be prepared to respond in its notice of the hearing, for the state to be prepared to respond to certain questions, a good faith estimate in terms of time, how many witnesses, and so forth. we are prepared to do that if the court would like. >> ok, let's do that during your argument. but see tha

and as mr. wade noted to the court, the state's position is that whether we have one trial or 19 trials the evidence is exactly the same. the number of witnesses is the same. and so many of the arguments that are made on the other side evaporate. i want to look at the cases that were cited by mr. cheseboro in his motion. griffin vs. the state. that's a case where severance was properly denied. it is not a rico case. brown vs. the state. another case where severance was properly denied. not a rico case. baker vs. the state. severance was properly denied. not a rico case. padgett. severance was properly denied. it's not a rico case. jones vs. the state. severance was properly denied. also not a rico case. zafiro vs. united states, federal case, again, severance was properly denied. that was not a rico case. henderson, which we just received just now, that was also not a rico case. severance was properly denied. mr. cheseboro points to a couple of cases in his motion where a conviction was reversed on a

. >> mr. wade, if you wanted to add something, otherwise, i am going through housekeeping issue. >> we have every confidence that the court can set a court trial, and we will adhere. >> i am open any time. and the new motions coming through the door, and mr. raferty, i am open to the prehearing briefing on the imm immunity, and mrs. powell has not added to that. >> i am waiting for the immunity briefing. >> yes. that is all i have. mr. raferty. >> i have been in the case for a month and august 30th shortly after i have been in this case, i sent a brady obligation, and as you know, they are independent of the discovery obligation, and they have a due process to turn over to me favorable information and i did not send them some blanket request saying give me everything under the sun, and it was a pointed request on august 30th that addressed two critical issues for ms. powell that she was not behind this incident in coffey county that forms the inclusion in the indictment, and whatever happened in co

mr. wade: absolutely. judge mcafee: ok. >> i do have a power, how does the court prefer i do that? judge mcafee: we will have to get you on the zoom call so you can share a screen. do you have a link for that? >> i do not, judge, but -- judge mcafee: let's see if we can email you that. >> does the governor have a paper copy of the powerpoint you can share with the council? -- he can share with the council? >> yes. >> i am not seeing an evil come through -- an email come through. >> just hold another minute. >> is it all right -- i'm sorry. can we make the powerpoint an exhibit if the government is going to use it to a record -- to the record? >> no objection, your honor. >> we have an extra copy for ms. smith? >> we can share ours and i can share with mr. rafferty. >> i do have a copy to the court and i can convert that to the exhibit -- an exhibit. judge mcafee: sure. >> i don't have the passcode. >> standby for another email. >> i've actually got it right here, your honor. >> i'm going to quickly move through, 178480, such defendant may be tried separately, in our case law will r

mr. clyde: thank you, wade. back in january we fought to fundamentally alter the way this institution works. we fought to restore the people's house and while we were successful in delivering transformational change, our fight doesn't end there. in the early summer months, we fought against the biden administration-mccarthy fiscal irresponsibility act, because this spend, threat of deal was disastrous for our nation's financial future. now we're faced with the battle of funding the government. and just as before, we're not interested in giving up when the going gets tough. we're not interested in allowing washington to revert back to serving the swamp instead of serving the american people. and we certainly aren't interested in rubber stamping the big government socialist agenda of joe biden, chuck schumer and nancy pelosi or their out of control spending levels or woke policies from the last congress. the country gave house republicans the majority to change the course of congress. green lighting a so-called cl

wade has been overturned. the horror stories we've seen with women having different situations in the pregnancies. so, no, by the way they are not talking about. it mr wade? giving advice about how to talk about? it >> trump doesn't know what he's talking about. below, that's a guy who's known he has won the nomination. he knows he has to win the general. and he knows this issue is killing republicans. >> karen finney, dewalt, thank you so. much geraldo is going to appreciate your commentary by the way. he was not thrilled why. it >> is 80 years old, he's looking for a job. >> that's what i would say. >> i'm moving on right, now thank you very much. okay >> five americans everyone, were free from detention in a run and they are now on a plane back to the u.s. as we are speaking today. some were held for years, and one of iran's most notorious prisons, and what it means once they're back on american soil, is next. every business deserves a great deal. that's why comcast business is launching the mobile made free event. with our business internet, new and existing customers can get one year of unlimited mobile for free. it's our best internet. powered

mrs. bush's early role of defined by an unexpected national tragedy, 9/11, laura bush made history while advocating for a world wade effort to focus on the brutal treatment of afghan women and children by the taliban regime during the weekly presidential radio address, mrs. bush was the first, first lady to deliver the address in its entirety. >> good morning i'm laura bush. i am delivering this week's radio address to kickoff a worldwide effortld to focus on brutality against women and children by the al qaeda terrorist network and regime it supports in afghanistan the taliban, that regime is now in retreat across much of the country. people of afghanistan, the women are rejoicing. afghan women know through hardening per yen what the rest of the world is discover, brutal op preg of women is o a central goal -- oppression of women is central goal of terrorists. 70 per of afghan people are malnourishes, one in every 4 children, won't live past the age of 5 because healthcare is not available. >> in may of 2013, michelle obama with her speech to the university students challenged in a way only mrs. obama can do. to m

mr. president. >> how do you think social issues such as the overturning of roe versus wade factors into the latino vote of 2024? >> this is very complex, generally latinos are pro-life, but there is a lot of belief in cases of exceptions. look, i'm pro-life myself, i'm staunchly pro-life with only exception of the life of the mother. but, i also recognize on the other side, there are folks who have made that a number one issue. but, this is where people have to connect and make your case on the side of why you feel a driving pro-life policy is the direction this country should take. but, merely to impose this agenda on the latino community and any kind of agenda, whether it is green or center-right, i think that is part of the mistake sometimes, the parties have almost taken the latino vote for granted on one side. you know, you don't get to impose the agenda, you don't get to say this is who latinos are. it is what it is, not what you wanted to be. you have to understand what we feel on these issues, but you have to ask, you have to show up and have a conversation with us and connect on those iss

wade and affirmative action and redistricting. >> i close by saying thank you to our congressional leaders. thank you to mrs. walters. [applause] [applause] >> i will add that in response to, voting is not magic. voting is medicine. magic and you do something once and it's done. medicine you keep taking it because if you don't whatever is wrong it's coming back and it is bringing friends. the other is remember that your friends don't think there into politics but we might than the politics is into them and it is a stocker. it's going to find you where you are. it's going to try to take away from you whatever you love and the only way to fight back is to do what these women told you to do to stand up, speak up, show up and let's get it done. thank you so much.e. [applause] >> so for small i would like to thank everyone for taking time to be here today. we understand this light happened on the hill right now, to take the time to start a small ask. i do want to reiterate, we are a nonpartisan nonlegislative office. and if you're interested in careers that w align, we want fr you to come and meet us down the hallway. how

wade and affirmative action and redistricting. >> i close by saying thank you to our congressional leaders. thank you to mrs. walters. [applause] i will add that in response to this voting is not magic. voting is medicine. magic you do something once and it is done, medicine you keep taking it because if you don't whatever is wrong is coming back and bringing friends. the other is to remember that your friends do not think they are into politics but remind them politics is into them and it is a stalker. it will find you where you are and tried to take away from you whatever you love the only way to fight back is to do what these women have told you to do which is stand up, speak up, show up, let's get it done. thank you so much. >> first of all i would like to thank everyone for taking the time to be here today. we understand a lot is happening on the hill right now. to take this time is not a small ask. i want to reiterate we are nonpartisan on legislative office. if you're interested in careers that align, we want you to come meet us in the hallway, however, we are here for everybody on all ideological spectrum sou

so i think politically, mr sur but then boris was was wading >> but then boris was was wading in sayingo save £23 billion. and we spoke to the mp for crewe and nantwich earlier. we worked out when a £2 billion a minute in the time it saves from a journey crewe to london. so journey from crewe to london. so isn't a good idea actually to isn't it a good idea actually to be prudent and financial , be be prudent and financial, be astute with the money at a time when we've got hardly any money left stop making everything left and stop making everything about london? >> yeah, there's an argument they started they should have started in manchester. worked manchester. martin and worked out work rather than out work south rather than starting and working starting in south and working north. think boris johnson was north. i think boris johnson was once by way. once against hs2, by the way. i think wasn't favour think he wasn't always in favour of sure wrote of it. i'm sure he wrote articles it , of it. i'm sure he wrote articles it, but that articles against it, but that was back in the day. i me

wade and you can get constitutional change like that but in terms of who can run in a particular election, i think the supreme court is our best option. host: mr. bopp, we can probably do three hours on term limits and expanding the supreme court create your thought on the question of the ideology of the supreme court. guest: we have a process of which the supreme court justices are paid. -- picked in that process being followed. there are people running around who do not like the results of particular courts and what they want to do is publicize and bad mouth them. i do not participate in that, whether the courts are ruling in my favor or in opposition of my arguments. we have to accept the basic intimacy of our process until we have a new process. then we will follow that. but professor roosevelt and i can agree several times that an early decision by the supreme court would be beneficial to our democratic process and avoid a catastrophe of this played out state-by-state. i want to talk about what the constitution provides in this regards. one of the provisions of section three is even if someone had engaged in insurrection, congress, the la

mr. ramaswamy: i picked that up at a young age. i am an absolutist. i think roe v. wadeas a constitutional disaster and was correct to be overturned because the federal government has no place to be legislating here, that includes federal funding for planned parenthood. when it now comes to republicans within a year of three decades -- i am one of them -- arguing for the importance of getting the federal government out of the way, now say we have to have a federal ban coming in in a one-size-fits-all for all states, that is wrong. my view is, this is an issue for the state. let federalism work. that is where i land as the u.s. president, which is why i am on constitutional ground again. a federal ban. some of my pro-life friends who disagree with me on this, i think more babies are going to die over the next 30 years if we do federalize this issue because joe biden and the democratic party is trying as we speak to put roe v. wade and codify that into federal law when the federal government should have nothing to do with it. i think the beauty of our american experiment i

wade have had now terrible point figuring out where to land as a party on the issue of abortion and democrats have clearly gained ground on it. mralong have been that way. it's now calculated that the issue is hurting the republicans and would hurt him if he adhered to it as his party's nominee. so he flipped on it and is he now clearly pro-abortion rights. at least is he banning abortion at any stage of pregnancy. it's interesting to see how people who have stuck with him on the religious right, evangelicals and so on will feel about this. it's going to hurt him. bret. >> so far nothing he has said hurt his standing with republicans. one one of the reasons losses in the house in the 2022 midterms is because of the abortion message. is this going to be a way for them to potentially get the house back? >> i think it is. look, you know, we have been going over all the last few days that don't look good for joe biden. and one thing we don't factor in is not only donald trump as a as the opponent in the general election, but the impact of the abortion decision that dobbs decision by the supreme court that continues continue roil, es

mr. president. host: how do you think that the overturning of roe v. wade factors into the latino vote of 2024?rally latinos tend to be pro-life, they are people of faith. there is a letter belief in cases of exception. i am pro-life myself. i am responsibly pro-life with over the exception of the life of the mother. i also recognize that on the others there are folks who have made that a number one issue. this is where people have to connect. make your case on the side of a why you feel a driving pro-life policies are the direction to take. it to impose this agenda on any kind of community, i think that is part of the mistake sometimes. the parties have almost taken the latino vote for granted on one side and ignored the latino votes on the others. you do not get to impose an agenda. you do not get to say this is how latinos are. the latino community is what it is, not what you wanted to be. you have to understand what we feel on these kind of issues. you have to ask him to show up and have a conversation with us. then try to persuade us if we are wrong or you feel like a individual latino is

mr. president, today marks 175 days since julie su's nomination was officially transmitted to the senate. this is the longest a cabinet nominee has wade for a floor -- waited for a floor vote. under the federal vacancy reform act, an individual can only perform the role of a cabinet-level position without senate confirmation for 107 days -- 207 days. it was created to require the consent of the senate. su was and you of unable to get the votes needed for confirmation. instead of rejecting the nomination, the biden administration is attempting to circumvent congress and the constitution to invoke department of labor's succession act, which they claim allows them to have ms. su serve as acting secretary of labor indefinitely even though lacking the votes for confirmation. this is unacceptable. not only is this use of the department of labor succession statute a violence of the advice and consent division of the constitution, which should offend both democrats and republicans as the president attempts to you surp the role of -- u surp the role of the legislation. major business groups indicated they are prepared to bring legal action aga

wade and you can get constitutional change like that but in terms of who can run in a particular election, i think the supreme court is our best option. host: mrpp, we can probably do three hours on term limits and expanding the supreme court create your thought on the question of the ideology of the supreme court. guest: we have a process of which the supreme court justices are paid. -- picked in that process being followed. there are people running around who do not like the results of particular courts and what they want to do is publicize and bad mouth them. i do not participate in that, whether the courts are ruling in my favor or in opposition of my arguments. we have to accept the basic intimacy of our process until we have a new process. then we will follow that. but professor roosevelt and i can agree several times that an early decision by the supreme court would be beneficial to our democratic process and avoid a catastrophe of this played out state-by-state. i want to talk about what the constitution provides in this regards. one of the provisions of section three is even if someone had engaged in insurrection, congress, the last s