that shows that's what that was understood to mean at the time. i think heller was receptive through the 20th century and rightly so. i think it's not unusual to look at the traditions to understand the meaning of the constitutional rights. that is especially appropriate for a couple of reasons. one i think everyone agrees that amendment is the right that is subject to some reasonable regulations and deciding what is reasonable the fact that they've been prevalent throughout history is a good sign that they are and especially so because of the point this court made in mcdonald that throughout the nation's history it's recognized and codified in state constitution as well as not something people were aware of and so the fact that this type of regulation coexisted for so long is a particularly strong indication. >> i will stop after this. heller cited decisions going into the 19th century as confirmation for what it had already concluded based on text and history at or before the time of the adoption. this is what it was understood to mean at the ti

and that i listen to everybody that i want to listen to, and that i'm ultimately moving forward on that basis. it is a lot easier to talk about than it is to do, and i have not always succeeded at trying to manage it the way that i would like to, but i really do think that recognizing that, you know, how other people are sometimes treating you is not about you and more about them and if you can do your best to be as generous as possible in the circumstance and just focus on the work, then it often works well. i would also say another thing i have learned is by going through so many institutions and job, it's very different in different places and the same government and even the same institution. you can be in one office and two offices, for example, and one institution is they can both be heavily male dominated and it's a different issue of diversity and the majority dominated space and yet, in one culture can be phenomenal and allow you to thrive and in another it can be challenging and i think recognizing that your experience is not what every other woman or person's experience is be

unlawful, that that it would consider disclosure only. i don't think it said it would disclose if the seizure was lawful. it said it would disclose only if it was unlawful. i don't know where, in any of our jurisprudence, we have ever suggested that an in-camera review by a judge threatens national security. >> our submission is not when the government invokes the states secret privilege that a court is altogether barred from looking at the in congress submission by the government to explain why the information is privileged. the ninth circuit went beyond that, relied on section 1806(f), to adjudicate the merits. it said the court should consider all of the constitutional challenges that the plaintiffs are bringing. >> i'm sorry, 1806 only permits on its terms a disclosure, if the information is seized unlawfully. i don't know where you would get that the court was trying to do anything else but determined that. i think there were some of the majority who wrote separately and said if the court chooses to disclose then -- but that is a big

that are tired, that are old and that are lazy. and that's exactly what she chose to do. but it's not the first time that we've seen this throughout the course of this trial. my only disappointment, pamela, is that it seemed like the prosecution is far more reticent to getting into the issue of race when they should have been much more aggressive about it throughout the course of the trial. >> what do you think about that, mark? do you think they should have been discussing race more? >> you know, the prosecutors know their audience. if this case was here, let's say in south florida, that would have come out a lot more. my feeling is that she knows kind of the pulse of the jury. you've got 11 white people and 1 person of color in a town that has approximately 26% blacks. and, you know, i think there's a reason why she didn't. i did find the defense lawyer's comments personally extremely offensive. that said, i'm going to defend her right to make it because her job is to do everything that she can to get an acquittal as long as it's

but that is what they feel and that is not the facts that that we know for sure. what we know for sure is that the jury spent three and a half days looking over every single day for hours the evidence that was in front of them. the evidence that was allowed into this case. the evidence that the prosecution put forward and the evidence that the defense put forward and they came up with a verdict. and in this country, when a jury comes up with a verdict, that is generally the final word if someone is acquitted because you cannot try someone twice. there is no double jeopardy in this country. and so at this point, kyle rittenhouse will walk out of this court and has a free person. that is basically the case here. and it has been calm so far with a little bit of arguing on the court steps but so far calm. >> stand by. this is kyle rittenhouse's defense attorney speaking. >> gross misunderstatement and kyle is not here. he's on his way home. he wants to get on with his life. he has a huge sense of relief for what the jury did to him today. he wishes none of this would

the challenge though, in that particular incident was that you had an agency that that determined that something had happened. it had understood that this was in the context of a lot of other events taking place and determined on its own merits that this didn't meet the kind of level of major or something that should be reported quantitatively right. the statistics that they cited were appropriate and therefore it was a reasonable decision locally but looking more broadly across the federal enterprise. what would determine when we became aware of that in the middle of august um was that this is an incident that could have happened in other places. we need to take that signature and check those other places which we did and it was something that in in the longer term, the longer scheme required an investment to make sure that we prevented this from happening again. my long story made short is that the context matters greatly and the fact that it took 2, 2.5 weeks to get to me is not something i find terribly surprising. we need to be quicker on the draw. we need to reduce noise to kind

>> i don't believe that. that's -- i don't believe that. i mean, there was the questions, and i think -- i said this to some people yesterday, when they asked to call off at 4:00, you could see the tenseness in those people, the jurors, at least i could or i sensed it, who were entering that room. and, you know, if they wanted to quit early, because i think they were tense. and if there was some early verdict and they were playing all of us for fools, they're great actors and actresses. i don't think that was the case. [ inaudible question ] >> i believe so. you know, i have clients from 30 years ago i still talk to. i get -- one of my oldest favorite clients, he moved out of racine, moved to minneapolis. he texted me congratulations. i talk to him once a month. i try to stay in touch with client who is want to stay in touch with me. i like to see them do well and i hope that kyle does. >> do you think they'll keep a low profile? >> i hope so. >> what do you think the amount of time that the jury took to do this says about how they handled

i'm glad to know that maybe they're some evidence that reminds us that more then emmy machine -- that's reassuring. but couldn't this view, george, this view of artificial intelligence, rising to a supremacy over everything, could be self defeating? i get that it's mistaken. but how could it be self defeating? but it could undermine the way these guys are thinking about it. >> it's because they tried to replace their customers and their necessary compliments. there's computer technology that they are creating, and which is an expression of their genius and human imagination and ability to have counterfactual projections. and to imagine what doesn't already exist or is not already in the program. >> that's the human part, right? >> yeah, that's the human part. medical -- you know, everybody, decades ago, ibm was introducing a diagnostic machine. using the ibm mainframe or maybe it was the digital main computer. i don't know. but the idea was that inevitably, inexorably, the machine learning or artificial intelligence would excel all human diagnostician's. >> right. >> and once the symbol

that, why didn't i know that? and it was in some ways the same story that we would hear from people who would attend the speaker series on suffrage say, gosh, i didn't know that. why -- i had a fairly decent education, why didn't i know that about suffrage or about wilson and race or about his administration. so we've taken those, and i agree with the exhibitions, i love the idea of having the plaque explain what we used to say and what we say today. the wilson house will be a museum, we'll be celebrating 60 years in the coming year, and we're looking to put through an exhibition on how we've changed as an exhibition space and as a museum over 60 years and tell that story which i think is actually fascinating to say what we -- how did we portray ourselves in 1963, 1965 and how do we do that today. but a very, very concrete story that just happened recently was with young girl scouts who came. it's a new program that we're trying to explore at the wilson house, is to have young girl scouts come. and they asked -- a

that is, i'm so grateful that you said that. because i know that the media is set up in a way to kind of, you know, attract people to drama. i understand that, but i'll be just be for my own personal experience. i feel like i'm pretty dialed into the civility stuff. i had never heard of this select committee prior to like a month ago. and the work that you all do is so meaningful and so powerful . brinkley, -- frankly, when i tell people when i told my friends like, yeah, i'm gonna be testifying on capitol hill about civilities, like there's an amazing select committee on the modernization of congress that's doing really powerful work to make congress work in. there is? so there is a responsibility. and i don't know, on your websites, if you have this front and center, this is something that people can actually see. so people are aware of the work that you're doing. it could make a huge difference to know that there is hope on the horizon. there are people who understand this problem because i'll tell you on the ground, people a

and that's a fact. >> that's a fact. >> that's a fact. we have documentation of lynching, we have documentation of legally man deathed segregation -- mandated session redivision. it wasn't black people who passed laws that forced black children to go to school in some that states that were funded at less than one-tenth of the rate per student than white people. so these are historical facts, this kind of discrimination that was, in essence, racially structured. a teacher has to teach that in order to even american history. to teach american history. that doesn't mean that the teacher is looking at the white kids in the class and saying this was your fault or this is your parents' fault. now, a white kid in the class whose great grandfather was in the state legislature many alabama in the early 20th century and voted for the appropriation for these schools, you can't deny that this kid's great grandfather was responsible, partly responsible for this. but you're not saying to the kid you're responsible. so again, this is a bit of a red herr

that says student profile report. that was not testified to. that was not tendered in . i don't have any problem of argument what he testified to, but once we start getting into what the curriculum was or an individual report -- >> all right. how how's that? >> that looks a lot better. can you just go back. >> sure. >> can i just digest it? >> sure. >> i object to the heading on that since it attempts to have a photo of something that was never testified to. >> what photo? >> it has an image of some coast guard thing. >> it's what he went to school. he testified to it. what is so objectionable about that? >> he testified where he went to school and what he did in the training and testified to his rank, which i think is the other thing shown on there. >> right. >> if we can get back to it. than removes that part. the objection is granted in part. as that slide has been amended, i don't have any issue with that. >> okay. >> but the use of that -- what he's talked about. >> then the satilla shores -- >> please back up one more. >> this was his testimony at trial. >> well, w

to do the best job that you can and accept that there are going to be some challenges that you can't overcome, there are many that you can over time, then you tend to serve yourself well in those circumstances. and i have found a number of places where i have done a thought exercise for myself, i have no idea if it would work for others, but you have somebody who seems to have that kind of reaction to women and i pretend they are like an uncle in my family or something like that. because part of the challenges making sure that you don't stop listening to them, that you don't lose respect for them, and in many respects, that is very easy to do when you are being treated a particular way that you think has nothing to do with you and do you sort of say, wise this acceptable? it is not. but the reality is, you still have to deal with those folks sometimes. and i think learning to figure out how it is you can do that while still getting the best out of them is really important. and over time, i have found a lot of the time, you can break through personally in a way that changes the dynami

sure that we can do that. that is lot of learnings right now. covid is an odd time. there is a lot of resources that are there and we're making sure that we're spending the money responsibly and making sure that we're using this as a strategic tool within the tool box of all the other spaces we have around anti-displacement in the city. >> i don't think i heard -- maybe i didn't frame the question properly. $10 million is there. is there any additional dollars that mocd has right now? >> they have commited to either existing processes or projects or to workouts right now or in anticipation, as we know, of the $10 million of what has been shared from different supervisors and good community groups in our own assessment with properties at risk. there was one property that was shared by supervisor mar that is actually at $9 million. it's a strong project right now but that would absorb a large portion of this. but it meets the geographic equity goals and spaces that are trying to provide the appropriate balance.

is that right? >> that's absolutely correct. this is the scary scenario that i think everybody should take seriously these days. >> the irony here is, you know, we face this same dilemma with respect to social media, etc. going back 10, 15 years. and this congress really wasn't provoked to think through it. we just sort of set there and, here, whatever you want. take it. and guess what, they have taken it. and now we're facing this crisis, actually institutional democratic crisis of what controls must we put on these algorithms, etc. and if we lose the power, and i think this is why you want to get us to think hard is the federal reserve loses monetary power to regulate this economy, then we are in very difficult circumstances. >> thank you senator, i think you smooiz by work probably better than i did. thank you. >> senator toomey raised a lot of important questions here today about the nominee. i think he's spot on. i have all those reservations but i have a couple of questions i'd like to ask. first of all, it's -- i've alway

energy that if that line just now not that i'm aware of the fact that couple of abusing things that are in there is number one, a pilot program to look at taxing people by the number of miles they, i've read today, we do it indirectly. so fuel taxes, of course, if you have an electric car, you don't pay those. so one of the things that is likely to happen though, because this is the history of taxes, is that the fuel tax will not go away. so you'll get if you own an internal combustion vehicle, you'll pay twice. if you own electric vehicle, you'll pay once that's a thumb on the scale that shouldn't be there. but then in addition to that, we are also consider infrastructure. mandatory breathalyzer is built in all new vehicles, 3 years from now. the technology do that doesn't exist by the way, but it's actually in the bill now whether it was in the one that passed. i'm not sure, but it was in the bill that was proposed originally on the subject of taxes and i now this is really going to tell you, the democrats have flooded the idea of taxing unrealized capital gains. ok. and then agai

is your testimony that that is not correct, that that didn't happen?>> we don't have evidence of that. the particular event you are referring to was one segment. i've looked at the numbers. one sector happened to be co-located with where there was whether with military activity that did create a chokepoint but it wasn't any kind of an organized activity. it was availability on one particular shift. a. >> your testimony as you believe vaccine mandates have zero impacts on pilot availability? i tell you i've met with the pilot unions and that isn't what they are telling me. your testimony is the vaccine mandates have zero impact on air traffic controllers that's also not what i'm hearing from the air traffic controllers. are they not telling the truth or what are the facts? >> i'm saying at this point in time i'm not seeing any impact from that. we work very closely with our union partners. i met with them within the last week or so, and we are not seeing any indication that there's been an impact on the staffing up to this point. >> passengers across th

of course, does that inspire people or do you think that, that intimidates people that perhaps on an individual basis, they feel that they can't do anything. and because the only way to get anything done is to have that kind of platform. i definitely think that is inspiring to see young people leading the climate change movement right now. but, but the thing that is also reflect that the climate change. you see that there is an issue of injustice. i can that climate change is they be getting their genetics non injustice ever seeing. and they require for young people and i don't listen to actually like a said bob on going to the street. they're going to school strikes. he's a huge indicator of how bad the situation is right now. how much, how much everything, how much action is needed to take place immediately. unfortunately, i have seen that representation matters. and we should be also, as i said before, including faces from the global house who are also doing amazing work at the local and regional level in terms of be kind of what james activities working with throughout the safe o

>> that's right i don't think so that language i think that language supports relief against the clerkssus whether courts should restrain there are instances of the court has recognized where it relief against eight judges and congress are recognized in section 198th in the text of 1983 judges can be properly defended. >> it's more than just that frankly. ex parte young depends on enforcement. it turns out the word enforcement is in their 27 times give or take a couple to describe what state courts do when they adjudicate private civil soups. >> the enforcer of the laws and east texas. i think that is clearly correct the court issues an injunction a mandatory injunction for the court is doing is enforcing. >> on the judge or a decision based on that law to think a judge is enforcing a law requiring, yes in a sense paid one way of looking at it is by requiring to be in court and requiring them to make filings and appear in court. [inaudible] break. >> legislature enacted a statute that said henceforth people of a certain race may not make any public statement. someone brings suit under t

but if you remember 9/11, that is in the day that you remember, and that's not the story that any of us lived that day. we didn't know when the attacks began. we didn't know when the attacks were over. it is the true story of 9/11. because when we try to hand this set of memories off to a new generation, to the quarter of the american population that no longer has any memory of 9/11, a quarter of the country now does not have a memory of 9/11. the facts of the day don't account for what the country did after 9/11. and when you look at the world that we created the way that it shaped our geopolitics internationally and our domestic politics. you can't explain the world that we are handing off to a future generation. because the decisions the country made. they were not driven by the history of 9/11. they were driven by the emotions of 9/11. they were driven by that fear and trauma and chaos and confusion so this book is an attempt to capture that sweep of the day not as we understood 9/11 later but as we understood while it unfolded. so to compile the book is a mix of original intervi

that is one of the ways that fundamentality can be established, that they are in the constitution.ost: to put this in layperson's terms, you wrote that conservatives are looking at the constitutional interpretation and suggesting an evolution of originalist thinking, a more expansive reading of rights. is that correct? evan: i should first clarify that i am by no stretch of the imagination conservative. but with that out of the way, i do think we are articulating an understanding of the 14th amendment that is both going to surprise conservatives in many respects, but is also going to tap into an intuition they have about what kinds of things unenumerated rights could possibly be if they were not going to give judges free rein to invent rights left and right. the way i can talk about this is with the process doctrine that conservative justices, given the lead in this respect by the late justice scalia developed, deal with the question of what fundamental rights are incorporated against the states? this is known as the glock spurred test. it looks to whether they are deeply rooted in

make sure that those boats _ that we must make sure that those boats are _ that we must make sure that boats are not leaving the french shores it — boats are not leaving the french shores. it is an incredibly dangerous journey. shores. it is an incredibly dangerousjourney. there has been loss of— dangerousjourney. there has been loss of life. — dangerousjourney. there has been loss of life, and today we have had to see _ loss of life, and today we have had to see unimaginable loss in a single event, _ to see unimaginable loss in a single event, and — to see unimaginable loss in a single event, and it cannot happen again. but how— event, and it cannot happen again. but how is— event, and it cannot happen again. but how is it — event, and it cannot happen again. but how is it stopped, then? how do you stop it?— you stop it? well, we have been in a situation where _ you stop it? well, we have been in a situation where you _ you stop it? well, we have been in a situation where you can _ you stop it? well, we have been in a situation where you can government| situation where you can governm

is that right? >> that's what we try to do. we tried to bring the sciences together, and economics is just another part of biology which is another part of physics which is all subsumed in a cosmic vision that were going to expound in our conference on november 102 the 12th. peter thiel will be the keynote and other speaking on artificial intelligence and bob metcalfe of metcalfe slaw is going to be expounding on the continued significance for crypto currency and other such paths of technological advance. we're going to have an exciting time and i'm going to debate newt gingrich on china. i don't think war with china brings any benefits that i can imagine. >> i agree with you on that. what could be less productive in a war with china? good grief. if our viewers when information about the conference which should they go, george? >> cause him .txt technology so technology is the suffix. >> cosm.technology. >> is it next month did you say on november? >> november. november 102 the 12th. >> okay. in the meantime you also releasing

, but no remedy that would address that.perhaps we unseat the jurors that have been seated. maybe incvite the black jury yos back. you can always come up with a reason to indicate why you struck someone from the jury. what's critical is your unde underlying reason you really stuck them. we're the bubba jurors. they were referring to white, non-college educated men. they said, the defense attorneys, what they were thinking. they acted in accordance with that. the answer is no. you only appeal the defendant when you get convicted. the prosecution, if there's an acquittal, has no basis or remedy under the law. if the jury utters the words, not guilty, the case is over. >> double jeopardy. the ship has sailed at that point. they would need to run it much sooner. now to the case of the 18-year-old kyle rittenhouse who's on trial for killing two people and wounding another during riots in kenosha, wisconsin last year. now, a juror was dismissed for making a joke about jacob blake. he, the black man whose shooting by police sparked

they did that, but they did it for a purpose and that was so that we might live, so that we might havepportunities. we need to keep perspective. one of the things that i see every day across this country as -- is people have lost perspective. so there's two things that i want to ask you to do before i go and i'll be all done. the first thing is is that we live in a country that is addicted to being offended, right? everybody loves to be offended by themselves. i'm going to ask you to get over yourself. just get over yourself. [applause] i had a pastor tell me one time -- he said, christie people are gonna throw offenses out at you all the time. but you're the one who decides if you want to bend over, pick it up and carry it around with you, and then you're the one carrying the burden. he said, you have the opportunity every time that somebody throws an offense out just to walk by and let it lay there and go forward. i'm going to ask you, there are people in your life that you have quit talking to. you think they're so far gone, that they disagree with you on politics and government and

it's not that they couldn't have that expertise. it's that that expertise does one example, an institution on the congressional side was literally shut down during newt gingrich's republican revolution, the contract with america. newt gingrich said we don't need technical expertise in congress, people can get technical expertise in the market. so we have made a systematic tedivisions in the federal government over time to erode the technical expertise and knowledge. that means we put our politicians in the position of primarily receiving input and advice from those that are paid to represent the interest of company so while lots of us are focused on the issue of the privacy legislation or ai regulation or upscaling in the future of work, i don't want people to lose sight of the fundamental task that we have, which is building a democratic system that is capable of governing technology before it governs us and that means thinking about the future of the federal civil service. it means thinking about what expertise we recruit for and

away, even state street can't take that away and that is something that took me deeper into my story. an early draft and god knows that early draft looked nothing like the final book because i was able to go deeper and there's something to be said for really exploring the way in which maybe wokeness can stand on its own two feet when not intermingled with capitalism . this isn't just woke ideology but it's merger with capitalism which taints both the progressive values corporations are asked to be stewards of as well as taking corporate purpose in and of its own right as well. that's what the heart of the book is about more than criticizing one end of the spectrum or another thestatue one might suspect the artist had different motivations . >> exactly and it embodies this uncomfortable marriage between the progressive left and the business of this country is an arranged marriage. it is not the marriage of love. i think of it more like mutual prostitution where each site gets something out of the transaction. the artist got money out of it, state street cover for their lawsuit. the sa

that was the summer project that she and her dad had. i said of my 11-year-old granddaughter can do this, this is really something that would be good for everybody in arkansas. i think i'm the only candidate ever that [inaudible] we need to put computer coding and every high school. people said you expect to get elected governor on this platform? and we did. people understood it and the future so i had momentum and we implemented this with the law was passed in which arkansas was the first state to actually mandate computer science to be offered in every high school in arkansas. fast-forward and that was seven years ago. i've been governor seven years and during that time we've made significant progress. recognized by advocacy groups and as leading the way and learning to code movement. in fact arkansas was recognized last year as having the largest share of high schools. the brookings institution recently in its extraordinary long profile on what we have done in great detail recently published a report studying arkansas' role and starte

over 8000 children and that eight that -- in that age range that is been hospitalized.ave been millions of children who have been infected. in of -- in addition to that, just the stress, the emotional stress of having to adjust your life to avoid infection. having to limit the contact you might have with a loved grandparent who you can help. --who you can hug. the vaccine has been authorized for children five through 11. i think there is going to be millions who get this before the christmas or winter holiday. -- holiday.. judge and that parents that have all of their children vaccinated. that, i think is absolutely terrific. host: what about families with children, newborns four years old? when should they expect a vaccine to be available if they so choose to get their child vaccinated in that age group? guest: those studies are underway. hear from pfizer, the furthest along. it'll be the new year before you see two to five. that's assuming that the data shows that the vaccines are safe and effective. they are looking at much lower doses of the vaccine and younger chil

we don't make policy based on that. that's the thing that the hardest to watch.we struggle with trying to communicate because people don't look at it that way. as you said earlier our brains are not constructed that way. the problem when we crawled out of ocean to the land, our hippocampus was too late to the game. new york state lottery wants to sell its tickets for a 14 million to one shot it doesn't with a simple phrase, it could happen to you. that's way people see these rare adverse events. >> right. if we evolved with an excellent sense of relative risk we probably wouldn't need formal training and a few like epidemiology, would we? that would come built in. >> right. at the very least we could be better about educating about the scientific method how it works at the elementary school level. i remember as a child mr. wizard, what before your time,, mr. wizard was a guy, my black and white television set in 1950s and 1960s would always be standing next to like a 12-year-old child who he would then explain scientific concepts like how you create a vacuum by p

how do you reconcile that? i think that this is the point that we are at now. we know that vaccine requirements including in the workplace do work. we have seen entities like tyson's foods reach over 96% of all their employees being vaccinated. we saw united airlines after instituting their vaccine requirements that they were able to get to the high 90's percentile. and thinks that having the vaccine requirement is recruiting advantage. it signals to potential employees they care about worker safety. there is a real reason why vaccine requirements are needed. but we also don't have to recognize the mill risk that that might entail. and do i worry just there are long-term effects to public health because of the fact that things should never have been politicized like mask answer vaccines are in these ideological crosshairs in the middle of culture wars. i worry about the long-term impact not just for this fight against covid but couldn't actually make us paradoxically and tragically even less prepared for the next pandemic. that important concept that dr. wen la

of and that bill. so when i think of what we've got to do for the cost of pharmaceuticals -- i use the word pharmaceuticals rather than the drugs -- they cost the pharmaceuticals, the cost, it is in build back better. i think there is strong support in our caucus for build back better. so today, for us to do the infrastructure bill, so the president can keep the job that we just heard about this morning moving forward, that is a huge deal for us, and then we will go on to do the rule so we can go home and await his final numbers coming from wherever they rather come from and do what we need to do to pass that bill sometime into the future and i will let the speaker tell us when that will be. rep. pelosi: let me just say how important it is to have a real though. once we have the rule vote, we have to pass to the floor. all of our memories voting for the rule says that we will pass the bill. there is the rule vote. people have to understand, this is the threshold. we will cross the threshold that'll wil

the committee unanimously felt that we did not have that test that we had articulated. this is faster than what people had expected six months ago. it's earlier and faster, and that's because our policy has been adapting to the situation as it evolves and it's clarifying itself. we see inflation coming in higher. >> let's go to mike derby. >> i wonder if the fed has given any thought to the balance sheet, once you get the taper process complete, will you hold it steady, or start winding down? do you have any insight into what bond buying goes for the economy in terms of impact, have you quantified it in any fashion? there have been questions about what bond buying is likely doing to help the economy. >> in terms of bond buying, now that we have tapered, i expect that is exactly what we will do in an orderly fashion. we will talk about investment at all those things. we have not made decisions, but typically, when we are doing a new subject, we will have a series of briefings and discussions, and that is what we will begin to do. in terms of the effective asset purchases

so i'm simply trying to ask you, that if you think that that not enforcing or lax enforcement, does thatintensify that pull factor? people come here, people respond to incentives. it's that simple. and if the incentives suggest that you can come here illegally and there is no consequence of that, and i think more people are going to come through illegally, would you not agree with that? >> senator, i agree that enforcing the law is necessary and appropriate. and the numbers are high. as a law enforcement off official i, again, will pledge to enforce the law. >> just very quickly, since my time is about out here. but on the supply chain issue, as you know, they have come under unprecedented strain. and we have got agricultural producers, including in south dakota, who continue to harvest crops. and these could threaten market access for products. as commissioner of the cbp, how would you work to resolve this issue and improve they love the? and perhaps you can quickly touch on how some of the union rules play into that and helping to contribute to the weight. >> i could not agree more, se

i think that g pool i think that there are 2 things that we need to consider. the 1st is for me for when i speak about the ha b spend and make that as last now or it will be kate's. see the 1980s i we know. hm. so any physician or researcher or whatever, speak onions, if there was not really a finding an in the add something that could sure help prevent o l good people and contamination h i p. now the, the fact that it is so easy now to speech online to be online and say in the debate and then in the healthy be that everybody just on the laptop and just say what they want to say. so that's the 1st thing for me. and the 2nd thing is that people now human, glad you did receive a lot of videos from whoever has them to be the one person video and saying. a with that i would say and tiger band and speech and they make once again for me it's a matter of and they can make what is what you know like. ok, we up that says he against it doesn't matter and people will see that. and then she is people, so they will release that because he expects me what the already believe

and the people that are pushing that theory, they argue as you know that, rich that america at least -- and i'm not going to talk about the world, there are other critical theories, critical theory as marxist roots, but that all whites are oppressors, that they have, you know, racism in their dna, that they're born with a property inheritance based on their skin color and that they have to consciously become anti-racist by renouncing racism. and there are lots of things about it, but it has -- people are supposed to confess their sins just like a religion, they are supposed to constantly repeat, you know, their sins. but there's no redemption like in the christian religion, there's redemption. you confess your sins one time, it's not a constant confession of sins. it argues though that racism is permanent, that minorities are permanent victims, and it's something that the people that are pushing it forward strongly believe in it. but what i argue in the book is not just that it's a religion, i argue that it's racist, that it's un-american, it runs counter to our civil rights laws and

there's a lot of that stuff that is objectionable that has gone on. he told them a big part of rittenhouse's defense is that the conduct of this guy, josh was in in ski who was a comforting the first guy who was shot, joseph rosenbaum. with the prosecutor said it was it do not worry about ziminski because i'm going to prosecute him for arson come january. that's not really that relevant to the trial and he's not supposed to be testifying about what he's going to be doing is prosecutor. he is to deal with the facts of the case. that's not what he wants to get to. >> john: before the jury was brought in to receive the instructions, judge kroger said that if he was acting lawfully in self defense, "the ball game is over." amongst the prosecution's presentation on the death of joseph rosenbaum, you see the chase through the car parking lot and rittenhouse turns and fired the first shot. it appears before rosenbaum got him. does that constitute self-defense? they made the case that he did not have his hands on rittenhouse's weapon but he did seem to be rea

that -- that really shouldn't be.e something controversial. >> reporter: the outrage that reached a boiling point over george floyd's murder seems now to be taking a back burner to concerns about public safety. across the country, anxiety over increasing gun violence has been diminishing the protest movement and efforts to fundamentally change the role of police. >> yes, we have our work cut out for us at the city. cops need to get paid more and fired more. we need to make sure that we're incentivizing the best-possible, most skilled and professional individuals that have deep-seeded connections with their community. >> reporter: the minneapolis ballot initiative was a first major electoral test of reform since the murder of george floyd and the ramifications of the initiative's defeat are resonating nationwide. >> and i think what you saw is the american people say we want a change in the police but maybe that means increasing, investing, and developing, not taking away. >> reporter: but reformers, despite tuesday's

that that is where we need to help fund that.ave. exactly, and that is why we are using solar panels to | why we are using solar panels to actually — why we are using solar panels to actually close _ why we are using solar panels to actually close that _ why we are using solar panels to actually close that energy- why we are using solar panels to actually close that energy gap, i why we are using solar panels to . actually close that energy gap, and we are _ actually close that energy gap, and we are getting _ actually close that energy gap, and we are getting to— actually close that energy gap, and we are getting to 100,000 - actually close that energy gap, and. we are getting to 100,000 families, about— we are getting to 100,000 families, about 40% _ we are getting to 100,000 families, about 40% of— we are getting to 100,000 families, about 40% of them _ we are getting to 100,000 families, about 40% of them with _ we are getting to 100,000 families, about 40% of them with solar- we are getting to 100,000 families, i about 40% o

that that's, that's the questions we need answered. i get to the question i have is that after i mean, so many things have been mentioned here. i mean, i've never heard humans a deep on the f b i because i think they, i mean, given their recent track record with wretched gate and all these other things here . i'm a little surprised, hadn't been mentioned. got more serious. no, here. robert, i want to stay with the 500 or so they're still in prison here. i mean, are they being made examples too, you know, to, to the public in general that, you know, don't know, don't, don't even think about protesting, because you could find yourself in to the, the grips of the, of the, of the legal system because it's quite terrifying. with these people are going through. okay. i mean from what i understand virtually none of them have a criminal record. go ahead robert. any, you know, these people, as you said, they're there for their uneducated i'm many of them are rural. and i think the reason they're still accustomed, because many of them are refusi

i will debunk that. that did not happen. it is the one fact in this case the defendant wants you to believe that there's no video of, and in fact i have the video of the entire incident. i've played it for you and i'll show it to you again. there is no threat. the there's also no evidence that mr. rosenbaum ever wanted the defendant's gun. he never said i'm going to take your gun. he never said i want your gun. there's no indication of that. dr. kelly has testified that the first shot that the defendant fired at joseph rosenbaum hit the victim in the right pelvis fracturing it. mr. rosenbaum was incapacitated at that point. he is -- whatever threat he might have posed it's over. there is no further threat. he is falling to the ground and the defendant doesn't stop after that first shot. he tracks mr. rosenbaum's body all the way down firing three more shots. a second shot which goes through mr. rosenbaum's hand and then a third and fourth shot, one that grazes the right scalp and one that goes right into mr. rosenbaum's back

a permit to take that take care of that and that project has moved along to get that notice of violationlosed. the other of those violations are inspection services and we did have some recent activity and the inspector has some notes on the complaint here but it looks like there are mostly maintenance issues and there was a notice of violation issuedon october 1, 2021 . mostly quality-of-life and maintenance issues, something that went and the inspector noted on 5 november, he noted that there were eight standing and like seven or eight has been corrected. i don't know that it's related to thework that's going to be done . there's a couple of items here that are still outstanding provide a handrail, and electrical outlets, provide adequate lighting .provide floor coverings, repair damaged wall so i would say to the owner and i hate to address it but i think these are items that probably can't be addressed immediately nevermind the status of the permit. i think they couldn't do this work but i would disagree with that and think they probably should move ahead and get those items taken ca

war i and if we win that decisive battle that we can set that right again after that we can deal witha south america south asia we would be in an advantageous position i if not then we are weaker and imperiled everywhere else. >> i will remind our audience to submit your questions. we are taking questions. we'll get to that in just a moment. strategy of denial. >> it is like short-circuiting you don't want to catalog the whole coalition and basically to get everyone to fight is not what you want to do you want to have a series of sharp force that convinces everyone that basically it will not work. in particular if china goes after taiwan and then the philippines will get the message so it's credibility is important in particular way and the ramifications that is catastrophically to handle the people can tell a difference and taiwan but if you are in japan i what he was a neighbor. >> i think you can see this from taiwan and vice versa. if the americans basically say we cannot do well enough to have taiwan because the chinese are too strong, then how does that apply to japan? that is w

what's clear is that once it was discovered that he had -- that he or she had a gun, that they either exited -- they likely exited the airport, but again, that's not clear. as jim can tell you, earlier reports are early reports and you have to do an investigation to get more. >> got it. jay, stand by for me. if you can, control room, let's work on jay's audio because i want to make sure we're hearing him more clearly because at this point we're not. stand by for me, jay. jim, let's bring you back into the conversation. so, what we learned from jay, from this statement that he literally just got in his inbox, and then of course what he said took place, try and add that kind of math equation up that i set up there which is perplexing to me right now in that you have a passenger with an accidental discharge whose bag was being searched as he sat there and then the passenger subsequently fled. and yet, the airport is assured, putting out a tweet that this is an accidental discharge and this passenger is not in their custody at the very moment. >> yes, that's right, yasmin, and my question

is that right. >> that's what we try to do. we try to bring the scientists together and economics is just another part of the biology. a cosmic vision-- [inaudible] speaking on artificial intelligence and bob metcalf of metcalfe's law is going to be expounding on the significance of crypto currency and other such cause owns, psychological events. exciting time. newt gingrich on china. i don't think war with china brings any benefits i can imagine. >> i agree with you on that. that could be less productive. if our viewers want information about the conference, where should they go, george? >> calls him .-dot technology. cause him .-dot technology. cause him cosm .-dot technology. cosm .-dot technology november 12. >> in the meanwhile you are releasing a brand-new book, i think the publication date is officially october 15 if i'm not mistaken, but the title-- is the cover of it. "gaming ai" very nice and compelling cover. i also noticed if you want to go to amazon you can order it already. they have some in stock, it seems like.

that group, that convene that press conference, called itself america's frontline doctors. among the other claims, associated with speakers of that event, if you have ovarian cysts that is because you've been having sex with demons in your sleep. very bad, you should stop doing that. then your variances will go away. also the u.s. government is run by reptiles, or to be more specific it's run by reptilian people. the people in charge of america are secretly losers which we need to take into account when they give us public health advice. you should interest public western medicine at all because it was made with alien dna. how else could they make those pills for stuff? except by extracting dna from millions and coming into the pill and checking you to take a. that's all the lives of people stay in charge. now, because the american frontline doctors that happened during the trump years it didn't end up just being like a weird piece of margin on the edge of the news. that group ended up, i could do not, getting praised by the president of the united states from the white hou

i wish that i felt that way when i was writing. it moments i felt ashamed thinking this person is going to be mad at me because i'm speaking of my experiences and since we are talking about literature there's a poem and it's a really short palm polmann it's really beautiful where she says they want you to remember your memories and i keep on remembering mine and so there was that vulnerability that made me a little bit nervous and talking about family things that happen in things that happen in school and people that i still have a relationship with and in some cases it involves my parents specifically for myself i would change the names or something like that but i felt like it was healing and if i was going to talk about the feminism i was going to tell the truth. i think that's a really big part of liberation in general. i couldn't come to this book and tell people you're feminism needs to evolve and you have a contradiction when you stand in contradiction when you say what you want in the world and we need to say let me tell yo