![]() He raises a question over whether the vaccine will work and then, again, says that people “have to maintain” their freedoms He says “you got your freedoms” while downplaying his own personal choice to get vaccinated (“I happened to take the vaccine.”)Ĥ. Trump says he recommends taking the vaccineģ. You have to keep, you have to maintain that. I’ll call up Alabama and say, ‘Hey, you know what?’ But it is working. If it doesn’t work, you’ll be the first to know, OK. Take the vaccines, but you got … … No, that’s okay. ![]() ![]() But you got to do what you have to do, but I recommend, take the vaccines. “I believe totally in your freedoms, I do. Look at exactly what he said on vaccines – both before and after he was booed: What’s worse is that Trump has zero inclination to try to control the creature he has built. And to do so in a state that is fourth in the country in overall cases of Covid-19 per 100,000 people, and fifth in deaths per 100,000 people, according to The New York Times. It’s that mentality that leads people to boo vaccines that are more than 90% effective in preventing serious illness and death from a pandemic that has already killed more than 628,000 Americans. If the government and the media lied about the 2020 election (sidebar: They didn’t) then what wouldn’t they lie about? People told that everything the government and the media say is a lie don’t have the ability – or the inclination – to differentiate. Click to subscribe!īut see, the problem with the care and feeding of all those lies – the Big one and all the rest – is that the non-belief takes on a life of its own. Mehta also specified that any argument about testimonial immunity would only apply to the second count for which Navarro was charged - related to his refusal to testify - and the first count, related to the production of relevant records, would be subject only to executive privilege.THE POINT - NOW ON YOUTUBE! In each episode of his weekly YouTube show, Chris Cillizza will delve a little deeper into the surreal world of politics. Notably, in a separate hearing in the courtroom adjacent to the one where Navarro was testifying, federal prosecutors in Trump's prosecution revealed the former president's legal team had mounted multiple sealed court battles over assertions of executive privilege in an unsuccessful attempt to stop a number of grand jury witnesses from testifying in the special counsel's probe.īefore Monday's hearing, Mehta ruled that Navarro would need to show formal, concrete proof during Monday's hearing that such protections had been invoked to make the privilege or immunity defense at trial. 6 House select committee and not to Navarro. The defense contended that it would have been "inconceivable" that Trump would grant executive privilege to all his other senior advisers who had been subpoenaed by the Jan. 6 subpoena, much less evidence that supports the claim that he formally shielded Navarro from testimony. When asked about his communication with Trump, Navarro said he did not email him directly and communicated with him through his aides, adding, "He's not a text guy."īut the Justice Department said there was nothing to prove that Trump even saw the Jan. Stanley Woodward, Navarro's defense attorney, said that he, too, wished there were more physical documentation of the executive privilege, but he argued that the "unconventional approach" did not invalidate Navarro's right to defend himself by saying he thought he had been formally restricted from speaking to Congress. "I still don't have any inkling of what the president's words were," he said. Judge Mehta raised questions about the existence of any documented evidence substantiating Navarro's claim that Trump directed the invocation of the privileges. Prosecutors had urged the court not to hold Monday's evidentiary hearing at all, arguing Navarro had not provided the court with any actual evidence that Trump had actually invoked executive privilege or testimonial immunity - certain protections afforded to presidents in specific scenarios - over Navarro's response to the congressional subpoena.īut in a ruling last month, Mehta wrote, "The court…will permit Defendant, through his own testimony or other evidence, to establish the factual predicate for the actual, proper invocation of executive privilege or testimonial immunity, or both, by the former President." 5, and the parties are estimating the proceedings will take just days to complete. After refusing to comply with the requests, Navarro was indicted on two counts of criminal contempt of Congress and pleaded not guilty. The select committee first subpoenaed Navarro for records and testimony in February 2022 as part of its investigation into efforts to reverse the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |