the petitioners the petitioners did file a motion for summary judgment, but the case was decided on the basis of the government's motion to dismiss before discovery and without any fact-finding. i'm assuming because mr. carvin has not said anything about the absence of a tax penalty, that at least, 1 of the 4 has and is, in fact, liable for a tax penalty, but that's the key standing question. now, with respect to the veterans point, your honor, if it is the case, as mr. carvin tells us, that mr. hurst was a veteran for only 10 months, then i think he's correct, he would not qualify for va health care because you generally have to serve two years. so that's where we are on standing. now, if i could turn to the merits. >> so are you saying one person does have standing? >> no, no. it will depend on whether as a factual matter 1 of the 4 has and is, in fact, liable for the tax penalty for 2014. and that's information that is not in the government's possession. it is in the possession of petitioners' counsel. and i should make one more point, with respect to 2015, there were no projections,

it's also a profound problem of notice here, that, you know, if you read petitioners' if you take petitioners' reading of the statute, then the idea that states were given added -- you can't possibly justify this as adequate notice to the states. >> well, mr. general verrilli, let me ask you this about notice. we get lots and lots of amicus briefs from states. and we got two amicus briefs from states here. 34 states, i think, is -- that's the number of states that declined to or failed to establish a state exchange? >> correct. >> now, if they were all caught off guard and they were upset about this, you would expect them to file an amicus brief telling us that. but actually, of the 34, only 6 of them signed the brief that was submitted by a number of states making that argument. 23 states, 23 jurisdictions submitted that brief. 17 of them are states that established state exchanges. only 6 of the states that didn't establish state exchanges signed that brief, how do you account for that? >> so, i guess i'd make two points about that, justice alito. first, you've got states there, 22 states i

it's also a profound problem of notice here, that, you know, if you read petitioners' if you take petitioners' reading of the statute, then the idea that states were given added -- you can't possibly justify this as adequate notice to the states. >> well, mr. general verrilli, let me ask you this about notice. we get lots and lots of amicus briefs from states. and we got two amicus briefs from states here. 34 states, i think, is -- that's the number of states that declined to or failed to establish a state exchange? >> correct. >> now, if they were all caught off guard and they were upset about this, you would expect them to file an amicus brief telling us that. but actually, of the 34, only 6 of them signed the brief that was submitted by a number of states making that argument. 23 states, 23 jurisdictions submitted that brief. 17 of them are states that established state exchanges. only 6 of the states that didn't establish state exchanges signed that brief, how do you account for that? >> so, i guess i'd make two points about that, justice alito. first, you've got states there, states in b

it is in the possession of petitioners' counsel. and i should make one more point, with respect to 2015, there were no projections, there's nothing in the record about the possible income of any of the petitioners for 2015, so there's really nothing that would establish a case of controversy for 2014. >> well, you're surely not raising a standing question with us here for the first time at oral argument, are you? >> well, mr. chief justice, as i said, that based on the projections, it was our understanding that at least 1 of the 4 would be liable for a tax penalty. the question of standing has been raised and i've tried to identify for the court what i think is the relevant question which is whether any one of the 4 has, in fact is, in fact liable for a tax penalty because -- >> this is this is on a motion to dismiss, right? >> well, that's correct, your honor, but it does also go to this court's jurisdiction. because if none of the four is liable for a tax penalty for 2014, there just isn't the case or controversy. none of them is

really set up a system in which the states are subject to the kind of onerous situation that the petitioner claims? and i think there are three textual indications objective, textual indications that cannot possibly have been the statutory scheme that congress tried to set up. first, is the existence of the federal exchanges. it would make no sense, no sense for congress to have provided for federal exchanges if, as mr. carvin suggests, the statutory design was supposed to result in every state establishing its exchange. second -- >> well, wouldn't it have been again, talking about federalism , a mechanism for states to show , that they had concerns about the wisdom and the workability of the act in the form that it was passed? >> so, justice kennedy, i think the federalism values are promoted by our interpretation because if that is, indeed, what a state thought, if a state really would have preferred that -- not to have the state government participate in the implementation of this act, for reasons that your honor identified, the structure of the act that congress put in place and that we

this construction was either mistrusted or misconstrued by hundreds of petitioners. for example, two years after ratification in 1870, a georgian wrote he held no legislative executive or judicial office previous to the war had engaged -- but had engaged in the rebellion in the ranks of the confederate army. he had been elected speaker pro tempore of the georgia house of representatives and desire to take his seat. despite his efforts he had been , blocked. the provisional governor of georgia along with several other , leading republicans affixed , their support for his petition on to the petition itself before sending it along to congress. his petition was among the 46 petitions that i mentioned presented by the senator from south carolina in february of 1870. this confusion extended even to those who may not have held such lofty positions. malcolm walling'ssford of washington, d.c. was another such supplicant. his petition is included in your packet. as a boy wallingsford had worked as an assistant to the mail carrier of the united states senate. an informal positi

and more than that, some briefs called petitioner's position frivolous, contrived.at was the government's position, so will you explain how the government -- the postal service still retains as far as we know, the exclusion of pregnant women. >> of course, justice ginsburg. it is correct that they imposed practices that ms. young makes in this case. we acknowledge that in footnote 2 in the brief to this court. since then, however, the eeoc has issued guidance, and that's a very significant fact. congress has charged. eeoc the -- the eeoc the purpose to force it. >> so we give -- what do you call the other kind? gee, you give that to me even when i'm in dissent. that just means treat it for what it's worth. >> the eeoc sets the enforcement policy for the federal sector with respect to this issue. that's a significant fact. we took it into consideration in deciding what the position of the united states should be. >> would your position here be the same if the 2014 guideline had not been adopted? >> we didn't take that position before the 2014 guideline had been adopt

had petitioner believed that the policy that u.p.s. applied which was to provide accommodations to employees on the job but not provide accommodations to any employees she could have brought a disparate impact claim. she attempted to bring one late in the day. it was dismissed because it was not exhausted. justice: can we talk about the claim she did bring. justice: your reading of the statute makes everything after that and you are -- ms. halligan: the reading we proposed is very straightforward. what congress said in the second clause the keywords are the same as other persons. what other means is simply distinct of what is mentioned first. employers have to treat pregnant employees the same as distinct group. and that's what u.p.s. -- justice: that is what the first provision does when it says pregnancy is the same as sex when we say because of sex, we always say because of pregnancy. ms. halligan: this explained in newport news that the function of the he second clause is to how the principles apply. and in order to repudiate. just

>> there's four petitioners. he is the lead petitioners. he's a vietnam vet. in his mid '60s living in virginia an our or so outside washington d.c. virginia has a federal exchange. it's a state before the supreme court, and he didn't want to talk to us quite frankly. he basically said "no comment" called the attorneys, they said don't talk to the press. he feels a little burnt, frankly, because a lot has been written about him, whether he should be part of the case whether he should have veterans benefit. we have pleasant conversations. >> what does he say is the injury since it starts with that - stop doing harm. what is the harm to mr king? >> in the affidavits what they say the injury is that they make so little money. he makes so little money that he falls below the individual mandate. if there were no subsidies, he would be exempt from getting insurance from obama care as he falls below the income threshold, with subsidies, in fact, that's not the case. he has to get that insurance. his argument is "i don't want the insurance or pay the penalty, the tax

the petitioners did file a motion motion for summary judgment but that was dismissed. i'm assuming because mr. carvin has not said anything about the absence of a tax penalty at least one of the four is in fact liable for a tax penalty but that is a key point. but in respect to the veteran if mr. hurst was a veteran for only ten months, he is correct he would not qualify for v.a. health care because you have to serve for three years. >> are you saying one person does have standing? >> no, it would depend on one of the four is in fact liable for the tax penalty for 2014. and that is information that is not in the government's position, it is in the position of petitioner's counsel and with respect to 2015, there were no provekss and nothing in the record about any of the income for the plaintiffs for 2015 so nothing that would establish a controversy for 2015. >> you are not raising a standing question with us here for the first time at oral argument here, are you? >> chief justice. we said based on our projections, it is our understanding that one of the four would be

the input from the legislation and, of course that is a suggestion that the id cards the massage petitioners not be displayed in a public place not to be stalked other than we whooeldz support this and the status of women passed the ordinance on february 25th and i believe a copy was provided to you i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> thank you, commissioners we have a number of public testimony and maybe we can move to questions from our presenters and for the public if you wish to speak on this topic and not submitted you're either your speaker form please do so we can be sure your called each speaker has two minutes we'll call two speakers in i could think so we'll be able to keep 9 con newport of your testimony first speakers (calling names) please. >> good afternoon. >> our secretary will be timing. >> thank you good afternoon, everyone thank you very much for hearing me today, i want to give a portrait of a legitimate massage business and point out that the law passed at the state level that exempted did buzz are these businesses was in petitioner p party part because it was up t

the petitioner is responsible for free of litter adjacent to the premise which they have control. regarding loitering. it's defined to stand idling about aimlessly without lawful business is prohibited under the license of the premise and under the control of licensee. number 10 and 11 speak to lighting and the interior lighting should be sufficient to see all patrons where alcohol beverages are delivered, consumed or purchased and make easily discernible the conduct of all persons on the premises and shall not disturb the normal privacy and use of any neighboring precedents. condition number 12. at no time shall the third operator promoter should have operation over this business. we want the ownership of the license to be responsible for his business and lastly graffiti. shall be removed from the premises and all parking lots within 72 hours of application. if it occurs on a friday or weekend day or holiday they shall remove it 72 hours following the next business -- excuse me beginning the next weekday. with these conditions we are recommending this application for approval and

petitioners have a nation's costs, in particularly the title iv program.r admissions might exceed the otherwise permissible limit because they have participated in the cap and trade program, so they have contributed to the reduction in emissions in that way, in a way that would be full cited in their own emissions. that is an excavation -- an excavation. i don't know what your explanation is. general verrilli: i know you're asking me to accept the premise, but i cannot because both the text of n1a and the legislative history tell you what considerations congas left open. the argument that your honor just post is not in the legislative history, and it is not in the text. congress really hot that, then what they would have said to epa is to push the pause button, take three years and study. they would have expertly told epa to study cost, and they did not do that. justice alito: if they all were concerned about health, why wouldn't they impose powerplants the same standard that is imposed on area sources? justice alito: i think they came very close to that.

. >> in my experience a lot of the vaccine petitioners get it at a pharmacy. >> i tell everyone do not get a shot of any kind at a pharmacy. >> they published an article outlining this danger and proper procedure for the ideal spot of an injection. >> i think it is a lack of awareness. if people knew about serva, people might be more careful. >> raul wished that was the case where he got his shot. his case is still pending. >> this has affected every single aspect of my life. >> a little discomfort is normal. these are serious orthopedic injuries. >>> a mid-air scare, a skydiver had a seizure at 9,000 feet. he had just jumped out of a plane when his body started convulsing. >> i roll on my back and for the next 30 seconds i'm in free fall unconscious. >> the ininstructor noticed something was wrong and pulled the rip court. he landed safely. he suffered from epilepsy but hadn't had a seizure in 4 years. lucky to be alive. >> yes. another reason not to jump out of an airplane. >> yes. >> reporter: rainfall, first time in 4 weeks we had rain during the week. crazy how winter has been. to

>> i think it goes to the absurd interpretation that the petitioners are asking the court to adopt. it makes no sense that congress would have written the law to coerce the states when they were intentionally trying to give them a choice and also that they would have tried to coerce the states in a way that no one understood to actually be coercing the states at the time. it's not a good to threat if you don't articulate the threat and no one understands there's a threat being made until a year and a half lit -- later. i was herltened by his taking seriously the concern to the imbalance in state and federal relationship that would result from the interpretation being pushed by the petitioners. >> i suspect the government was hardened by justice kennedy's question which said if your interpretation is adopted, won't that really unconstitutionally coerce the states? but more heartening was the combination of justice kennedy's question read against justice kagan's preceding question which was, hey, if congress is trying to coerce the states why would they do it in this obscure provision

. >> so is it out pour of discussion (inaudible) more expensive than the petitioner they're basically doing the same thing. >> that's a public health what are you referencing. >> i'm looking at the permit at the it is 1 hundred and 46 for the practitioner. >> those are not combfrnd by the planning code. >> did this include the hotel spaces. >> there are accessory uses in a large hotel that's one of the exemptions i mentioned the planning code has 3 exemptions and that's one mentioned. >> commissioner ortiz-cartagena. >> so in essence i'm just trying so bear with me so if say i'm a warehouse owner and build several studios for out call practitioners to come and practice their trade when they come to the location it's not specific. >> but will they go through a cu process. >> how you're using that space as a massage establishment you'll be required to do a cu and the controls that are proposed from what i understand. >> so from whatever you can use it for your r i don't know. >> so basically the cu process is one the caveats to the practitioners. >> from the planning department's prospe

the city attorney, regarding existing litigation in which the city as a plaintiff, defendant and petitioner and gas and electric company is an adverse party. >> all departments nice of you to join us, could you begin by introducing, we are missing somebody? >> okay. >> we are going to go into closed session. >> okay. >> and so, we have already. >> okay. thank you, we have taken general public comment for this particular item as i have announced when that we would take public comment in the time that we opened general public comment for item number 33. and so at this time, is there a motion to go into closed session? >> moved by supervisor kim, and seconded by supervisor kristin sen and without objection we are adjourned >> okay, welcome back, to the board of supervisors meeting and we are reconvening from closed session and during our closed session we took no action. so at this time, is there a motion to not disclose any portion of the closed session discussion? motionedly supervisor ferrill and seconded by supervisor tang? and without objection, we are not going to be disclosing anything

they don't have to pay if you're a thooefts you don't have to may additional fees to afford the petitioners the only thing changed is the - >> only if you own a business. >> uh-huh. >> what is changing you need to if e and you have a c mc exemption we're turning back the clock to 2009 you have a have a permit it is only for businesses that primarily have the impact where it's heltd not a single massage therapist. >> so only the permit - >> and license from the public health. >> i don't hear a reasonable objection the primarily issue is the cu process being what it is so. >> thank you very much. >> commissioner adams. >> i just not to echo what my fellow commissioners have been saying commissioner ortiz-cartagena and thank you all for coming and speaking because you know you guys had something to say and you know, i feel like in san francisco the one person that struck a chord was the one that spoke about san mateo it seems like here we are another layer of bureaucracy and fees it is toucher and tougher for small businesses i think about the massage positives you get from that i don't see ac

both justices antonin scalia and sam alito who were strongly favoring petitioners in their arguments both conceded there would be huge consequences. both used the word disastrous consequences. catastrophic consequences. they just really had these ideas about fixes. so as you said, justice scalia was like, congress will fix it. justice alito said the states will go ahead and create state exchanges, or we could just push the pause buttton until they do. nobody seemed to dispute this was going to have unbelievable consequences on the ground. the only real question was, sort of getting out of the reading the statute, which is what we're supposed to be doing, is how easy it is to fix it. >> in terms of the obama administration and political strategy around this, a lot of people are talking about the obama administration not coming up with a plan b, if the supreme court strikes down this law, if they rule the way the conservative justices seem inclined here, the obama administration said we have no contingency in place. we don't expect that to happen. it would be bad law and we're not doin

. >> this is comfort food petitioner muhammed, a simple bread made from flour and water dipped in broccoli stew. he shares it with others. he is trying to wash away the taste of the detention center where he just spent nine months and what happened there to another pakistani detainee. >> he had been locked 20 months. he was released and given a month to live free, but was arrested again. he told police he needed to work and send money home to his mother, brother and sister, but they wouldn't listen. thee hours later. they brought him in. he hung himself. >> the second suicide in as many months here, testament to the failure of a policy of indefinite detention for people who aren't criminals. it even apply to say minors. flaunting europe's pretrial day tension limit of 18 months was greece's method for dealing with migrants. >> the council criticizes greece. the change in government has brought a change in policy, this camp wound down, inmates being released at the rate of 30 a day. >> they enjoy a deportation waiver. the new leftwing government is thinking of turning detention centers into

a crowd celebrated in carson after petitioners gathered double the number of signatures they needed tohe plan up for a vote. the proposed stadium would be shared with the rival san diego chargers. while there is still quite a way to go before the stadium is built, the city is already dreaming big. >> what would it be like if carson, california hosted the superbowl? [ cheers and applause ] carson is already a great place. but come on, a superbowl? >> though the raiders have said they will only move to carson if they can't get a deal done with oakland, the chargers have stated they will only move if they can't get a new stadium built in san diego. >>> the animation always looks nice doesn't it? the self-driving car is being put to its biggest test yet. the coast to coast road trip starts tomorrow right here in the bay area. >> reporter: it may be the first of its kind, a cross country road trip. three people will be riding in the car, but most of the time, nobody will be driving. >> it is the longest coast to coast journey of an automated car from san francisco to new york. >> reporter:

with that many petitioners by its own rules, the white house will have to respond. lester?> peter alexander at the white house, thank you. >>> now to a war that continues to create some unlikely alliances. iran is now playing what could turn out to be a decisive role in the fight against isis in iraq. the battle to win back a major city from isis militants. it's the biggest counteroffensive against isis so far. nbc's bill neely with more tonight from northern iraq. >> reporter: it's a decisive moment. iraqi fighters surrounding tikrit trying to drive isis out of a major city for the first time. they've begun slowly to push into the city that gave birth to iraq's former dictator saddam hussein. but outnumbering the flags of iraq's army are those of shiite militias, a rainbow that's alarming the u.s. because these are men armed, trained and backed by iran. directing them from tikrit is the head of the iranian revolutionary guards elite force. america's top general told congress today that of the 24,000 men attacking tikrit, 20,000 are iranian-backed. >> the activities of the

the petitioner is responsible maintain free of litter the property adjacent to the premises which they have control. number 5 is with loitering and standing aimlessly about and prohibited on any sidewalk or building adjacent to the premises under the control of the licensee as depicted in his ab abc diagram. lastly -- the last condition is the exterior of the premise shall be equipped with power to imliewm nate and easily discernible the conduct of all persons on or about the premises. additionally the lighting shall not disturb the normal privacy and use of any neighboring residents. with these conditions we are recommending this license for approval and i would also add that the applicant has concurred with these conditions. >> thank you lieutenant. let me ask if philip west is here from the treasurer or a rep. please come forward and we will ask supervisor christensen to weigh in on this as well because it's in district 3. >> good afternoon. hi. so this is my third business venture in san francisco. i'm the owner of range in the mission on valencia street. i'm also the owner of thir

the ruling is enforceable only on behalf of the petitioners, and their states. i do hope however, that this attention does shine some light on the fact that there is an ongoing effort to impose restrictions on what elected local officials can do at the request of their people, and that it calls out the activities of incumbents to block consumer choice and competition through legislation. the bottom line of these matters is that some states have created thickets of red tape designed to limit competition. we're not talking here about the state's authority to determine whether a community can offer broadband to its citizens. in both north carolina and in tennessee, the state has given the localities that authority. but that grant of authority has been undermined by state-imposed bureaucratic red tape requirements. and what we're doing today is cutting away that red tape consistent with congress' instruction to, quote encourage the deployment of broadband, and, quote promote competition in broadband. so while we've heard a lot of talk about legal issues up here toda

think this will be anything but a crisis if they side with the petitioner.s will fix it more importantly acknowledging that the implications, the real world implications of taking away the tax subsidies are enormous. >> we only have a few seconds. let me ask the panel. does anyone think if the ruling goes against the people fighting obamacare that this finally ends it and this is settled and this is the law and there's no more votes to repeal and people work within the framework? >> there will be votes to appeal on the house side. they'll keep doing this until kingdom come. this is a fragile flimsy argument. it was ginned up by a libertarian think tank. the question is i think if they come up with something more flimsy or not. >> i think it's a legitimate argument. four words. four words and the court has an array of approaches it kwcan take. there is a whole bunch of other -- >> they've -- >> no, we don't. we don't. it's all over the map. nancy pelosi -- >> all right. all right. justices i'll let you settle this -- >> at the end of the day, this is not the

petitioners have conceded page 22 of their brief that an exchange that hhs sets up is supposed to be the same exchange. then petitioners say function just like the state sets up itself. >> putting a lot of weight on the word "such," such exchange. it seems the most realistic of such to mean federal government shall establish a state exchange. rather it seems to me such means in exchange for the state. rather than in exchange of the state. how can federal government establish state exchange. that's gobbledygook must mean something different. >> it doesn't gobbledygook. go back to something justice scalia asked earlier. if language of 36b were exactly the same as it is now and statute said in 1321 that an exchange set up by hhs shall qualify as an exchange established by the state for 1311, you wouldn't change language of 36b one iota and there wouldn't be any doubt in anyone's mind that subsidies were available on federal exchanges. what we're saying effectively read 13g 11 and 1321 together that is what the statute does. it's reasonable reading only reading that allows you to be fate

ironically, it is michael carvin and the petitioners' argument that would be coercive to the states,ot respect the states' choice in this matters. congress specifically aloud for -- allowed for flexibility for states to set up their own exchange or to allow the federal government to run those exchanges in their stead. we believe that if the court follows the plain text of the law, if they follow their clear precedents on the idea that you read a law in its entirety and in its context just as tissue -- just as justice kagan made strong points about the need to read the law in context. it's clear that tax credits are available to all americans no matter which state they live in, no matter which exchange, which entity runs the exchange. we saw members of congress in the audience and they know very well what they wrofmente we -- what they wrote. we filed a brief in the case indicating to the court that everyone at the time understood the law to allow for tax credits regardless of whether the state or federal government facilitated exchanges and even opponents of the law, you know congres

the petitioner on the other hand must prove a negative. he must prove that he did not commit any crimes based upon the set of facts used in the original conviction. the attorney general declined to be interviewed but ford must now prove he did not handle any crimes stolen during the murder. he now lives at a refuge for former death row prisoners, set up by a man who spent 18 years on death row. >> they want to play god and people who did this they done sent their children off to college. >>reporter: glenn ford is destitute. >> i'd like to spend time with my family and they're in california and i'm here. i have no means of going there. >>reporter: the litigation is expected to last for several more months at least. >>> still ahead on al jazeera, he's one of the last of a very old profession. and in sports history is made for this indian badmitton player. >> every sunday night al jazeera america presents the best documentaries. this week... >> i felt like i was just nothin'. >> for this young girl, times were hard. >> doris' years in a racis

the petitioner, on the other hand must prove a negative. he must prove that he did not commit any crimes based on the set of facts used in the original conviction. the attorney general declined to be interview but ford must prove that he didn't handle any goods stolen at the time of the murder, a charge not proven at his trial. ford now lives at a refuge for former death row refuges. set up by this man who also was on death row. he has little fifth in the justice system that can snatch decades from people. glenn ford is destitute. >> my family was impacted. they are an in california, not here. >> the litigation is expected to last for several more months at least. al jazeera, new orleans. >> brazil's president is under pressure to try to stop the crow down in hercrow--slow down in her country's economy. last year it narrowly missed sliding into recession with a growth rate of just 0.1%. as a result analysts predict 2015 is likely to be a difficult year and as our correspondent adam raney reports, it's consumers and small business owners who

the petitioners in my view are arguing against common sense and the actual text and the intent of theact and that intent was to make sure that millions of struggling families and individuals could obtain affordable health care coverage. in my view, this should not be a difficult case for our supreme court to decide. looking at the law itself, the text is clear. to cite some examples, when a state declines to establish an exchange, the federal government is directed to fill in and establish -- and i quote -- "such exchange." this makes insurance coverage and tax credits become applicable to any applicable taxpayer regardless of where that taxpayer might live. furthermore, the information used to calculate the subsidies is gathered from everybody who buys an insurance plan. that would be unnecessary if americans in only some states were eligible for the tax credits. now, on top of this it is a firmly established principle of statutory construction that when interpreting a provision of a law, a court should read the provision in context not in isolation. it should consider how the part f

. >> in my personal experience a lot of the vaccine petitioners get the vaccine at a pharmacy. >> reporter: debby got her shot from a pharmacy and was awarded $108,000. >> i tell everyone, do not get a shot of any kind at a pharmacy. >> reporter: the journal of american pharmacists association published an article last year outlining this danger and giving pharmacists tips on proper procedure, including the ideal spot for an injection. >> i think it is a lack of awareness. i think if people knew, if it was publicized more, people administering vaccines might be more careful. >> reporter: raul wished that was the case. >> this case affected every single aspect of my life because of a single flu shot. >> reporter: these victims developed serious orthopedic injuries. >>> helping the homeless because he knows what it is like. how a struggling teen in the world rose to someone who is now giving back. >>> drivers don't have to say a word. we'll be right ba >>> what a nice soup, just to make you feel good inside and also good for you. >> very good for you because we are using kale. loaded with nu

on one hand challenging the petitioners.e other hand, later in the argument seeming to come out against what the government was saying on all of this. those subsidies go way for folks in those states. some 8 million people. they have no backup. >> they want it to mean. >> those plaintiffs say those four words are clear. melissa: safina hillary clinton's personal e-mail. clinton addressing the subject that has people really concerned. >> i want to answer right from the start. people have read a lot of different day into my pants who. [applause] melissa: steve moore is here to discuss this more. she could barely do it. white gold dress thing. what do you got? >> she invented twitter didn't she? >> when you are using private e-mails, that means you don't want anyone to find out what you are saying. what is she saying? i cannot wait to read these. melissa: james freeman. whatever reason, my brain cannot handle that. it is a lot of trouble. making sure you can have control over these e-mails. you have total control over what is t

the petitioner must prove a negative. he must prove that he did not commit crimes based on the set of facts used in the original conviction. the attorney-general declined to be interviewed. ford must prove that he didn't handle any goods stolen at the time of murder a charge not proven at his trial. ford lives at a refuge for former death row prisoners, set up by a man exonerated after an 18 years sentence, 14 on death row. he has little faith from a justice system that can snatch life from the innocent. >> people that did this they don't do nothing. >> reporter: glen ford is destitute. >> whatever time i have i'd like to spend a few months with my family. they are in california and i'm here. i have no money to go there. >> reporter: the litigation is expected to last several more months at least >>> sierra leone is struggling to enforce a 3-day lockdown aimed at stopping the spread of ebola. everyone but health workers were told to keep off the streets for 60 hours. guinea deployed forces to the south-west in response to