>> well, first let me just say that i did not have paul butler as renaissance king quoting beyonce lyricsd. >> i didn't either. >> you know what, paul. shout out to you. let me also say that i initially predicted that 2023 summer was the summer of the black woman, but no, this was the year of the black woman, and that's whether you're talking about beyonce, our queen, shakari richardson, making ncaa college coach history. coco gauff, simone biles, i could go on and on. when black women win, it feels like a win for not just them individually but collectively, in a year that is so exhausting for so many black woman. "the color purple" in droves. this is the year that we needed as black women, especially headed into the next year. >> the winner, black women. david, it is up to you now, tell us who won the year? >> joy, one hakeem jeffries, and here's why. this was a terrible year for politicians, start on the republican side, donald trump indicted four times. kevin mccarthy tossed out of office. five other republican leaders get humiliated and lose. ron desantis started on third base and sto

alexander, katie phang, anchor of the katie phang show, gwen keys, and former federal prosecutor paul butler. blayne, we didn't get to see these arguments, but we did hear them. walk us through what just happened. >> reporter: so ana, what we heard for the better part of 30 to 40 minutes or so was this kind of back and forth between meadows' attorneys and the d.a.'s office, and of course a lot of questioning from judges. the central argument for all of this is that meadows says that basically everything he did while he was the white house chief of staff fell under those duties. in fact, during today's hearing, it kind of harkened back to meadows' testimony a few months ago. he was on the stand for three hours and essentially described that, you know, his duties as chief of staff were anything and everything and in between. basically whatever the president needed and wanted. we already know that judge jones shot down that argument basically saying, no, we were acting more toward the trump campaign than you were as chief of staff. that's why this case shouldn't be removed. this was at the cent

paul butler, first to you. the legal implications for hunter biden in ignoring a subpoena. i misspoke earlier because jim jordan ignored the subpoena from the january 6 impeachment committee, but they didn't refer it to doj. so he never was in contempt. he could be held in contempt. >> he totally could be. that's totally what could happen. the house sometimes has closed door depositions before it presents a witness in open court. the house january 6 committee did that with many of its witnesses. if you are subpoenaed by congress, you kind of have to show up or you could be held in contempt. the question is, will there actually be consequences? what would have to happen is that the house oversight committee would have to vote for a certificate of contempt. that certificate would have to be approved by a majority of the house. then the house would have to refer that to the united states attorney for district of columbia. since 2008, the u.s. attorney for dd.c. received ten of those referrals from the house. he has only prosecuted two. he or she has only prosecuted two. the od

joining me now, nbc news legal analyst, paul butler. paul,et's get into this. the michigan supreme court rejects the case on procedural grounds writing, we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this court. in fact, they never got to the question of whether former president trump actually engaged in the insurrection. apparently, one of the dissenting justices is leave the door open to take this up again. is this the end of the case in michigan? >> absolutely not. the michigan case was decided on procedural grounds. michigan's state law does not allow election officials to decide who is eligible to run in primary elections. in colorado, by contrast, anybody who is seeking the office of president has to attest to their legal qualifications to hold that office. michigan doesn't have a requirement like that. it's really about the difference between primary and general elections. the minnesota supreme court actually ruled the same way that the michigan court did. remember, in colorado, there was a trial. the court determined that januar

professor paul butler for joining us, thank you. still coming up after the break, a group of black women filed a class action lawsuit against the largest credit union in the u.s., alleging racial discrimination in mortgage lending. i'll speak with their attorney, ben crump, right after this. this is the reidout, and i am charles coleman junior. stay tuned. >>>n junior stay tuned >> >> welcome back to the reidout. i'm charles coleman junior, in front away tonight. nikki haley's claim that the civil war was simply about economic freedom was absurd on many counts. especially considering disparities that exist today that directly stem from slavery and jim crow. disparities such as housing discrimination. during the civil rights movement, the fair housing act was indicted to try and write that wrong. but today the homeownership gap between white and black households is even wider than it was a 1960. and black applicant is more than twice as likely to be denied a home mortgage as a white applicant. now we have seen the scenario play out o

joining me now is super lawyer paul butler, a former prosecutor, georgetown law professor, and msnbclegal analyst. how are you? >> i can take the glasses off and talk to a lawyer. attorney butler, before we get there, before we talk about this mosh posh of cases that donald trump currently has facing him, i'm presently interested in wayne county because the reports we are hearing about donald trump making phone calls there to pressure potential electors, those things could potentially land him in hot water as well. am i not seeing that right? >> i think you're seeing it exactly right. so everyone has been focused on the federal charges regarding election interference. and state charges in georgia, but in every state that was contested, trump basically did what he did in georgia. so i think what some states are doing is charging fake electors, they're watching to see what happens with d.a. willis in georgia, but trump is certainly not out of the woods in terms of other exposure in state criminal court for what he did to try to steal the election. >> so he could be looking at even more

paul butler is a former federal prosecutor who served in the public integrity unit at the doj and now teaches at georgetown university law center. theyer both join me now. i'm glad to have you all here. i'm not a lawyer, i only play one on tv. harry, here's my question. so what does jack smith hope is going to be the ruling? like what could chutkan actually say, what could her ruling be? could she basically say, hey, anysi reference to undercover agents is thrown out? would that limit to what trump would say in trial? what's a ruling actually like. >> that's definitely it because these are rulings you could otherwise make during the heat of the trial,de and smith is saying let's do this up front and let's get this off the table. look, if you're doing -- it's notou simply these things as ry detailed are far-fetched, they're illegally irrelevant. the jury'sga job is to decide t truth or i falsity of the charg, not to nullify the charges for some political sympathy. so if she has made this ruling, andhi i believe she will, and a ryan saysan they've done it in other settings, then when tr

joining us now, nbc news justice and intelligence correspondent ken dilanian, and paul butler, a former federal prosecutor and a professor at georgetown school of law. he's an msnbc legal analyst. so, ken, these recordings do have echoes of the infamous phone call to georgia secretary of state in 2020. what is the significance of this reporting? >> it is arguably worse than georgia, jose, because, you know in georgia, it was relatively close, 11,000 or so votes. in wayne county, joe biden won by more than 150,000 votes. there were no credible allegations of fraud, and this was a totally ministerial move by this board of canvassers to certify the election for history of democracy. there were two republican holdouts that were wavering and those were the people that donald trump and rnc chairman ronna mcdaniels allegedly pressured. in the end, they went through with certification, but had they caved and had there been a problem there, you know, it really would have put potentially american democracy in turmoil. it is another example of how former president trump tried to gum up the works t

joining us now, ken dilanian and paul butler.e settlement is an abuse of bankruptcy protections. how are they building and arguing that case? do you have a sense of how the justices are viewing this challenge? because it would excuse the family from any further civil lawsuits but it's a lot of money. $6 billion that was, if this is upheld, goes to communities and victims all across the country. >> that's right, andrea. so this is a case of money versus principle. the u.s. trustee, a unit of the justice department, is objecting to this on the grounds of principle saying the family should not be able to have the benefit of bankruptcy, shielded from future civil suits without actually declaring bankruptcy. which they did not. the doj is largely alone though in making this case. everybody else involved wants the settlement to go through because as you said, there are billions of dollars at stake. dollars for state governments. for individuals. for children who were born addicted to opioids. there's a lot of settlement pools. there wa

paul butler and kristy greenberg. >>> a nevada grand juror has indicted six fake electors into the probe of the 2020 election interference. the wednesday's indictments include kenneth chesebro, one time attorney to donald trump, called the alleged architect of the elector scheme. joining us now is senior national political reporter for nbc news, natasha, tell us who was charged? >> the people charged are the hierarchy of the nevada republican party. you have the gop chair of the state party who's been charged now with two felony counts, michael mcdonald. we wrote about this previously, he testified in the federal grand jury with regard to election interference. also charged is the vice chairman, jim degraffenreid. and the rest of those charged are all republican party members. what's significant here and worth noting is that these same republican hierarchy is going to be running in two and a half months, running the nevada presidential primary caucuses. and they have already been accused of being in the tank for donald trump, this is going to make it a lot more difficult for them. obviou

joining me is paul butler. and glenn kirschner. both of my guests are msnbc legal analysts. to hang out with y'all. what starts with the significance of pence being witness. >> pros and cons of calling him as a witness. he will strongly push back against trump's big lie. it's not just the credibility he has as former vice president and a republican, it's also that he was on the same ticket. he lost the election just like trump did, so his presence will signify to the jury the importance of the peaceful transfer of power. so i think that that's huge. it will be a strong rebuke to the former president sitting at the defense table. there are some cons, though. first of all, as far as we know, we know he wasn't in the grand jury in georgia. we don't know whether fani willis has interviewed him. she doesn't really know what he's going to say. why is that significant is it took him a while to come around to the big lie. reportedly he said to federal prosecutors at first he had all of these questions. >> yeah. >> it wasn't until his son, a united states marine said, dad, you have t

jack smith are closely watching donald trump and if he violates, there will be consequences. >> paul butler. thank you both, guys, appreciate it. >>> former house speaker kevin mccarthy gave his farewell to congress in the last hour. the california republican, among other things, talked about being removed as speaker just a couple of months ago. >> do not be fearful if you believe your philosophy brings people more freedom. do not be fearful that you could lose your job over it. i knew the day we decided to make sure to choose to pay our troops while war was breaking out instead of shutting down was the right decision. i also knew a few would make a motion, somehow they disagreed with that decision. do it anyways. i would do it all again. >> mccarthy decided to resign from congress at the end of this year. that leaves house republicans with an even slimmer majority at least for a few months until a special election can be held. >>> coming up, how the white house is taking on big pharma and putting money in the pockets of prescription drug users. >>> and a major development in the stabbing d

. >>> joining us now, msnbc legal analyst paul butler and former republican congressman and politicalt, david jolly. paul, i'll start with you. any predictions on how soon the supreme court could act on this request to hear an appeal in colorado if the supreme court decides to hear it at all? >> steven, the supreme court takes its own sweet time. it's hard to know. they obviously understand there's an election coming up. so, i expect, especially because the states start reaching very different conclusions that the court will take the case and probably render a decision by the end of the spring. so, think may/june. >> still pretty far away from right now. paul, what about the insurrection clause. that did not work for michigan supreme court. but it did in colorado. why the difference? >> so, think about the difference between a primary election and a general election. so, the michigan case was decided on procedural grounds. michigan state law does not allow election officials to decide who is qualified to be on the ballot in a primary election. that issue is not raised until the genera

and paul butler is here, but not physically with us, and he's a former federal corruption prosecutor tment of justice. paul, i'm going to start with you, my friend. our resident, lawyer. you know, the appeals court, they wrote this, quote, like any other criminal defendant, mr. trump has a constitutional right to speak. and his millions of supporters as well as his millions of detractors have a right to hear what he has to say. also like any other criminal defendant, mr. trump does not have an unlimited right to speak. so,, paul when it comes to donald trump, do you think that the appeals court struck the right balance with this particular ruling? >> i do. the court shot down his first amendment arguments, which is what he was arguing the loudest. remember, judge chutkan said when you are a criminal defendant, you don't get to use all the words. if this court basically said the same thing, it's said many of trump's statements threaten the integrity of the court. and the court also said that this is trump attacking somebody and then there's a torrent of threats of retribution and viole

paul butler, msnbc legal analyst, former prosecutor and -- and eugene daniels, msnbc political contributor and white house reporter and coauthor of political's playbook. great to have you three with us. paul, i'll start with you. there's never been an american in the situation that donald trump finds himself in right now. certainly, even as a country, let alone as a political figure, he's a person cruising to the republican nomination. he is facing major legal challenges from seemingly every angle. we, as the voters, will not know his legal status by the time we start casting our ballots. and so, it just -- it is a perplexing moment for our legal system, in what the role of the legal system is here. >> yeah, so the federal election interference -- [inaudible] this only four counts. contrast that with the ableist 's r. i. c. o. case, which started out with 19 defendants in 41 counts. but that case could still be number two. that's because judge cannon's low key slow walking the mar-a-lago documents case, and d. a. bragg's said his manhattan prosecution can wait until after the federal trial

paul butler, former federal prosecutor who served in the public integrity unit of the doj and the teachers at georgetown university law center. they both join me now. i'm glad to have you all here. i'm not a lawyer, i don't play well on tv. so i like to have people explain legal consequences on this. harry, here's my question. what does jack smith hope is going to be the ruling? what could chutkan actually say? what could her ruling be? would she be able to say hey, any reference to undercover agents is thrown out? with that limit what trump could actually say at trial? what's a ruling he would actually like to come down before we hear some of the rules about january 6th? >> that's definitely it. these are rulings that you could otherwise make during the trial, during the heat of the trial, and smith is saying let's do this up front and get this off the table. so look, it's not simply that these things, as ryan detailed, are farfetched. they are legally irrelevant. the jury's job is to decide the truth or falsity of the charges, not to nullify the charges for some political sympathy. so if

joining me now is paul butler, former federal prosecutor and msnbc legal analyst who along with, by the way, also with us jennifer reuben, an opinion writer for the washington post and an msnbc political analyst, the author of the book, resistance, how women save democracy from donald trump. welcome to both of you. thank you for being with us this morning. trump. jen reuben, this makes us wonder whether the only way to deal with donald trump and prevent him from becoming the next president of the united states, short of people voting that way in november, is some sort of a political answer, is something that the republican party does as opposed to something the courts do. what is your sense of it? >> well, they're headed, just as you said, the map that you pointed out is critical. he could well wrap up the nomination and then be convicted. the most likely scenario is that he will accumulate a majority of the delegates either on super tuesday or shortly thereafter when that criminal case begins. jack smith has an excellent case, the decision that you reference from judge chutkan, it kind

florida, msnbc political analyst david jolly, former federal prosecutor and nbc news legal analyst, paul butler former fbi counter intelligence agent peter struck. and also the president of the national action network and host of "politics nation" here on msnbc, the great reverend al sharpton. david, talk about the lengths -- i mean this reporting from cnn is just stunning. the lengths that the trump campaign went to, the trump allies in order to have these fake elector certificates at the capitol on january 6th. >> yeah, simone, first, you know, something i don't think we've ever really focused on, how dirty is ron johnson in all of tis, right? he does all these interviews, he kinds of plays up his whole i was protecting the election integrity, but he was very much involved in this. ron johnson kind of sitting in the u.s. senate as one of the chief conspirators is something i think we often overlook. but i also think all this information from the phone calls that were made to the election canvassers in michigan to this effort how we shuttle a slate of alternate electors to the u.s. senate, it

former federal prosecutor and msnbc news legal analyst, paul butler. say that five times, paul.gent, peter strzok. and also, the president of the national action network and host of politicsnation here on msnbc, the great reverend al sharpton. david, talk about the length, i mean, this reporting from cnn's suggests stunning. the blanks that the trump campaign went to, the trump allies, in order to have the fake elector certificates at the capitol on january six. >> yeah, simone, first, something that we don't focus on, how dirty is ron johnson and all of this? he does all of these interviews, kind of place up this whole, i was protecting election integrity, but he was very much involved in this. ron johnson kind of sitting in the u.s. senate as one of the chief conspirators is something that i think we often overlook, but i also think that all of the information from the phone calls that were made to the election -- in michigan, to this effort of how we shuttle a slate of alternate electors to the u.s. senate, it all actually goes to defeat a fundamental claim of defense of dona

in december of last year, the japanese defeated paul butler and won. four main championship titles in the lightest weight, then the boxer decided to give up all belts and move up to the second lightest weight. uefa may introduce sanctions at once against 10 european clubs due to violations of financial fair play. this is reported by the spanish publication mark. in the list, in particular, milan, manchester city and barcelona. maximum sanctions can be applied against clubs excluded from the list of participants. european cup tournaments, compliance with financial fair play is a necessary condition for participation in competitions held by uefa. according to mark, the investigation will continue until february next year. the national team is more important than club: inter miami superstar lionel messi will miss at least seven mls games for his club team due to the argentina national team matches. the player will have to travel to the national team on the official fifa dates, which will mark. on his opportunity to play for inter. messi will miss at least the matches against dc united, n

want to bring in now former prosecutor, paul butler, to talk about this. to play here? does this thing go to the supreme court as we've talked about previously? >> you know, if mark meadows has moved to case to federal court, there would have been the same charges and same prosecutor. this was really about trial strategy. the federal jury pool in atlanta has more white people and more conservatives. meadows probably thought those folks would be better jurors for him, but as blaine said, so far, four judges have snapped him down under the law. the trial judge and three appellate judges all ruled this is not a federal case because what meadows is alleged to have done in georgia has nothing to do with his official responsibilities and it's not just what the appellate court said. it's who said it. judge william pryor who wrote the opinion is so conservative as we heard, that donald trump actually considered appointing him to the supreme court. so in terms of meadows' options, he can prolong the inevitable, but judge pryor's opinion is evidence that even the mo

i talk to paul butler last night on a normal federal prosecutor, colleague of ours. about hunter biden's attorney's assertion that if his last name was not biden, then these charges would not have been brought. paul said that he agrees with that. what say you? do you agree? >> i agree with that too. when they bring the tax case they're looking to bring it to deter people. usually the high profile case. other huge amount of money, hundreds of millions or it's a very famous person. wesley snipes. pete rose. people like that. hunter biden in his own right is not a famous person. he's only well-known because of his last name. that's why would be with paul. so i have heard arguments that hunter biden only paid all the taxes back because the fbi came looking for it. this is what the people are saying, shannon, i'm telling you what they're saying. should that be taken into account? >> usually, it's not. most federal prosecutors who look at these kinds of cases, republican or democrat, they're gonna say this is not the kind of case you bring because the money has been paid b

joining me now, vaughn hillyard and with us is paul butler, a former federal prosecutor and professortalk about the fallout and how republican candidates are reacting. they are all coming to donald trump's defense, even those who have been mildly or seriously critical of him, like chris christie. >> i will let paul get into the legal. this is difficult. we heard from nikki haley say it should be up to voters to decide donald trump's fate, not judges. we have heard ron desantis come to his defense saying the supreme court should reverse the colorado supreme court's decision. ramaswamy suggested he would remove himself from the ballot in colorado in solidarity with donald trump. what you are watching run parallel to these serious conversations about whether donald trump should be disqualified for having engaged in insurrection or not are part of the american population that are engaged in violent, graphic, explicit conversations as it pertains to threats they are levying online against, in this situation, the justices on the colorado supreme court. you said it, one individual threatenin

paul butler is a former federal prosecutor, georgetown law professor, and msnbc legal analyst. former ohio republican governor john kasich is an msnbc political analyst, and vaughn hillyard is here with me. he's been following the trump campaign reaction. so ken, give us the nuts and bolts of this decision. what should we make of this january 5th deadline? >> chris, first of all, this was one of dozens of lawsuits that have been filed nationally to disqualify mr. trump under section 3 of the constitution's 14th amendment which was designed to keep former confederates from returning to government after the civil war. but until now, every court that has ruled has decided against disqualification. six states so far. this provision bars from office anyone who swore an oath to support the constitution and then engaged in insurrection or rebellion against it. it's been used only a handful of time since the decade after the civil war. the colorado supreme court with all seven judges appointed by democrats, ruled 4-3 that mr. trump did engage in insurrection and does come under the pro

. >> jonathan dienst, paul butler, thank you. >>> today, top democrats and conflicting strategies aboutshould take on donald trump. up next two people who have advised presidential campaigns weigh in. you're watching "chris jansing reports." weigh in you're watching "chris jansing reports. hi, my name is damion clark. if you have both medicare and medicaid, i have some really encouraging news that you'll definitely want to hear. depending on the plans available in your area, you may be eligible to get extra benefits with a humana medicare advantage dual-eligible special needs plan. all of these plans include a healthy options allowance, a monthly allowance to help pay for eligible groceries, utilities, rent, and over-the-counter items. the healthy options allowance is loaded onto a prepaid card each month. and whatever you don't spend, carries over from each month. other benefits on these plans include free rides to and from your medical appointments. and our large networks of doctors, hospitals and pharmacies. so, call the number on your screen now and ask about a humana medicare advan

paul, no. ms. butler, no. the clerk: mr. braun, no. ms. rosen, aye. the clerk: mr. cruz, aye. mr. budd, aye. ms. butler, aye. the clerk: mr. schmitt, aye. mr. ossoff, aye. the clerk: mr. manchin, aye. the clerk: mr. warner, aye. the clerk: mr. johnson, aye. the clerk: mr. risch, aye. ms. cantwell, aye. the clerk: ms. smith, aye. the clerk: mr. carper, aye. mr. coons, aye. the clerk: mr. young, aye. the clerk: mr. boozman, aye. the clerk: mr. markey, no. mr. rounds, aye. mr. sullivan, aye. the clerk: mr. lee, no. the clerk: mr. warnock, aye. mr. cramer, aye. the clerk: mr. sanders, no. mr. whitehouse, aye. the clerk: ms. baldwin, aye. the clerk: ms. hassan, aye. the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. mr. bennet, aye. the clerk: mr. schumer, aye. mr. booker, no. the clerk: mr. padilla, aye. the clerk: mr. ricketts, aye. the clerk: mr. cassidy, aye. the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 85. the nays are 15. three-fifths of the senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative -- three-fifths of the senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in the affirmative, the mo

about whether prince harry and prince william at the time should meet and says diana's former butler, paulto stop him allegedly selling diana's secrets to the press and a story was written about this. the concern was that the newspapers had somehow got information about a phone call between these two very senior royals. and that that story was something they published. that is another one that will attract, if it is one of the 15 that the judge has all the pun, in favour of prince harry, that is another one where the damages would be quite high. i'm going to go back to see if we can get any more news out of the court. mrjustice fancourt saying the sum is modest, £140,000, and they reflect the hurt experienced by the duke because of mirror group newspapers�* concealment of the wrong wrongdoing. let�*s talk about damages. what do you try to get in cases like this, the ballpark figure? it cases like this, the ballpark fiuure? ., , , , ., figure? it really depends on the distress caused. _ figure? it really depends on the distress caused. that _ figure? it really depends on the distress caused

senators voting in the negative -- booker, braun, hawley, lee, paul, sanders, warren, welch, and wyden. the clerk: ms. butler, aye. ms. baldwin, aye. the clerk: mrs. murray, aye. the clerk: mr. merkley, no. ms. murkowski, aye. the clerk: mr. fetterman, aye. ms. hassan, aye. the clerk: mrs. shaheen, aye. vote: the clerk: ms. lummis, no. mr. marshall, aye. the clerk: mr. lujan, aye. mr. manchin, aye. mr. warner, aye. the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye. the clerk: mr. blumenthal, aye. the clerk: mr. barrasso, aye. mr. vance, no. ms. sinema, aye. the clerk: mr. schmitt, aye. the clerk: mr. markey, no. the clerk: mr. lankford, aye. vote: the clerk: mr. scott of south carolina, aye. the clerk: ms. rosen, aye. the clerk: mr. padilla, aye. the clerk: mr. cruz, aye. the clerk: mrs. britt, aye. the clerk: mr. durbin, aye. the clerk: mr. daines, aye. the clerk: ms. klobuchar, aye. the clerk: mr. risch, aye. vote: the clerk: ms. cortez masto, aye. the clerk: ms. smith, aye. the clerk: mr. peters, aye. the presiding officer: the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 87, the nays are 13, and the conference report is

butler, capito, cardin, casey, cassidy, duckworth, durbin, fetterman, grassley, hirono, johnson, kaine, klobuchar, manchin, murray, padilla, ricketts, schumer, police. senators voting in the negative -- marshall, paul, scott of florida. mr. sanders, aye. ms. ernst, aye. the clerk: mr. cornyn, aye. mr. johnson, no. mr. risch, no. the clerk: mrs. blackburn, no. the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. the clerk: mr. merkley, aye. the clerk: mr. kennedy, aye. vote: the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye. the clerk: mr. markey, aye. mr. warner, aye. mr. kaine, aye. ms. cantwell, aye. the clerk: mr. heinrich, aye. mr. schatz, aye. ms. sinema, aye. mr. murphy, aye. mr. cotton, no. mr. lujan, aye. the clerk: ms. collins, aye. mrs. shaheen, aye. ms. hassan, aye. mr. peters, aye. mr. sullivan, no. the clerk: ms. smith, aye. ms. stabenow, aye. the clerk: mr. budd, no. the clerk: mr. reed, aye. mr. mullin, no. mr. moran, aye. mr. boozman, no. the clerk: mr. braun, no. the clerk: mr. romney, aye. the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye. the clerk: mr. warnock, aye. mr. wicker, aye. mr. rounds, aye. the clerk: mr. wyden, aye. ms. baldwin, aye. the clerk: mr. graham, aye. the clerk: mr. whitehouse, aye. the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye. the clerk:

paul, schmitt, wyden. the clerk: mrs. britt, aye. ms. baldwin, no. the clerk: mr. tillis, aye. mr. durbin, no. ms. butler, aye. ms. hassan, aye. ms. cantwell, aye. mrs. murray, aye. ms. warren, no.