start in six bond films, including his comeback. diamonds are forever now, only one actor has appeared as bond just once australian model george lassonde be in the 1969 film, roger moore played douglas seven more than any other actor, seven times. in the late '80s, he was replaced by timothy dalton, who appeared in only two films. pierce brosnan brought bond into the 2000s and start and the highest grossing bond version up until that time and the most recent, daniel craig, he announced no time to die would be his last. craig's casting in 2006 was met with backlash fans threatening to boycott because of his blonde hair, blue eyes, and honky looks but the tone quickly changed after casino royale hit theaters and went on to play the iconic spy four more times >> and so if the role does >> go to aran taylor johnson,

hopefully he knows how to order a martini. the bond way. shaken, not stirred and thank you for watching news night. laura coates lives starts right now >> do you know who i've got on the show tonight? i'm talking to ask celine merchant and lawyer who'd nathan wade kicked off the fani willis prosecution team >> what exactly was her goal >> alaska. >> and ms men who were tortured? by the squad. phase two of their torturers in court today. those former cops who will now swap their badges for prison jumpsuit, that and more tonight, unlock codes lot i really could not wait to talk to all of you tonight i'm between these former cops in mississippi finally being sentenced for what they did to two innocent men to trump asking for absolute immunity.

what we have got a lot to talk about, don't we >> well, tonight, trump >> gave us all some more insight into why he thinks he should have absolute immunity. tongue. the supreme court and a brief if they don't give him immunity, it would quote, be the end of the presidency as we know it. and would irreparably damage our republic that trump talked about it just last month saying the quiet part out loud are now quiet really is these days, but it's all about avoiding being indicted there is nothing more important to a presidency that immunity because they have to be free to make decisions without saying, oh, if i do this i do that as soon as i get out of office, we're going to be indicted >> that's true. there's probably a lot of things a president can do without fear of being dated criminally, right? one way is maybe not doing the things that might get you into what i digress details as they say, right? >> now, >> trump's legal team was arguing that future presidents could face quote, de facto

black male and extortion while in office if the justices don't, by his sweeping view of immunity, they've got to plan b though, don't pay the ever popular delay, delay, delay tactic send the case back to the lower courts to see whether any partial theory of immunity might apply and that of course would do what it would delay. it, push the trial back for months, but that's a federal case, even just in the slightest sense. there are others including state trials, are they're not, there are parallels obviously between january 6, the one happening in washington, dc, whenever that trial met take place in the one in georgia. and that one in georgia. well, that captivated the nation not just for the facts that have been alleged in the case, and the number of co-defendants. but for the attempt to disqualify the lead prosecutors, and i'm talking about people like fani willis, the dao the fulton county. and ever since i've been covering this case, and of course, that hearing, those dates of those

hearings, i've got a lot of questions, especially since the judge decided to keep fulton county da funny was on the case until nathan wade to leave while night. i'll ask the lawyer who fought to disqualify qualify here because she's here tonight, dirac to the ruling allowing her to stay on the case. and what happens next joining me now, ashleigh merchant, the attorney who called for fani willis, the d.k. and fulton county to be disqualified. ashleigh. so good to have you on the show this evening. how are you? >> i'm good. thank you so much for having me >> well, i had been watching as the nation did as well, that entirety of the trial you had this motion to disqualify the fulton county da, as you know, it failed. the judge would think you did not meet your burden of trying to prove that she had a conflict of interest that would hurt a right to wave fair trial. now you are appealing that decision, but tell me on what grounds are you going to appeal >> were appealing it on a

couple of different grounds. we definitely thought that there was evidence of forensic misconduct, so we thought that the judge got that wrong and that there was evidenced that based on a couple of things that she did one of them was this what we call the church speech? after i filed the motion and before it actually was responded to, she went at martin luther king junior day. she went in front of the church and actually gave this speech and someone's like sherman, where she was talking about my mode is talking about my clients motives, talking about the different factors of the case she had hired three different people and that we were only calling out one and then it must be racist and so that was one count. >> there was also a book that she gave >> some unprecedented access to the authors into the decision-making room where she made decisions, honest indictment. so we thought that was forensic misconduct, but that plus the relationship and plus the way that everyone testifying, the manner that they testified, we think all of that was enough to show that she should be removed from this case >> and good. actually, the

judge did not agree with you on a number of those aspects. i mean, the church speech, in particular, he did address that notion. did believe that it may have had an impact on a jury pool. but of course it was a prospective one and that was in the distant future. but on the issues, particularly of the misconduct in the witnesses themselves. you had witnesses who took the stand. there were a couple that really stood out to me. one was the former employee of the da's office. there weren't many follow-up questions to corroborate when she had seen them kiss or hug in that respect? also, you had the former law partner and friend and lawyer of nathan wade terrence bradley, i believe and it seemed as though he was refusing to admit much of the conversations you claim to have happy with them, even basic, he did not want to answer questions citing privilege. do you think he lead you astray? and did you ms judge, the quality of his testimony >> now and you know why i know terrence. i've known him for many years. i think he was

truthful in his conversations with me. and if you look at how things happen, you look at the timeline he was talking to me. he was very truthful. he had a lot of context and that's one of the things that we look for when we're evaluating credibility do you have context to what you're telling? and he would tell me things and then give me contexts. you give me details that only someone who actually had firsthand knowledge would know and i was also able to corroborate a lot of things. so he gave me details such as robin yeartie, he led me to robin yeartie and i was able to actually corroborate robin yeartie, corroborate the condo he had led me to that so those were things that told me that he was telling me the truth. >> but when you >> land oh, theism is going to go to that very point for the same way, he may have led you to believe that prior to actually taking the stand, but the first time we saw him, he was saying that he couldn't say anything without the bar of georgia essentially giving him an opinion that he could had an in camera or conversation with the judge about this very the issue. and really, i mean, it was no easy feat trying to get him to answer a single one of your questions, even when you send them a text message

>> right? it was very difficult and i could tell when he when he was testifying, he looked at me and said, i'm trying to save my law license and i knew based on the timeline that the weekend before he he had received a phone call from mr. wade to his best friend who had reminded him of his privilege. so at that point, i knew. and you can always tell my demeanor changed in my questioning at that point because when he said that, i knew and he was worried about protecting his law license and he was not going to explain anything in detail. and so it was going to was going to be incumbent upon me to pull out this the text messages and to remind them of everything that we've talked about. >> are you suggesting that whatever phone call may have been made by nathan wade through a best friend as intermediary to his former council was somehow width witness tampering or just saying that he was reminding him of attorney-client relationship? >> well, we made those allegations in court that it was we didn't make the allegations that it was actually witness tampering but he did call who was under subpoena and told him through a friend to pass along a message to remind him that he had

privileged. and so i do think that that was something that mr. bradley internalized and that was the first time i'd heard privilege prior to that, we had never heard the term privilege in all of our conversations. we've been talking for months, the term privilege had never come up that had never been something where mr. bradley said, oh, let me tell you this, but it's privilege, nothing like that. so the first time or even came up was when mr. wade interjected into the conversation, i wonder if there was more than one goal here. >> because on the >> one hand, disqualification was certainly the goal. it was stated as such in your motion. but it seemed as though another goal was to perhaps fatally fatally undermine the credibility of this prosecution team, which frankly is the right of defense council to zealously advocate for their clients do you think you were successful in trying to undermine the credibility of the prosecuting team >> that was never a goal. and it's unfortunate that their conduct is what led to that. but we did uncover a lot of conduct that i do think undermine their credibility rightfully. so i think there's a lot of questions on their

credibility. i think there's a lot of questions on ms spending through there were a lot of things that we were not able to bring because it wasn't relevant. there were a lot of questions that you would hear objected to and i was not able to go into because of relevance, particularly the money issues. so we weren't able to establish all of that because we weren't permanent to go into that because irrelevancy grounds, but i do think that now there there's a lot of other entities that are investigating and there'll be able to determine hopefully, whether or not there was any misspending of public money, whether or not there were any other things that were going on that were legal. >> of course, that was what the judge pointed out in terms the relevancy and thinking about normally, if there is an issue of credibility or otherwise you take them down to the bar. the georgia state bar, i'm talking but not the drinking kind of deal with ethical issues of this nature but i'm at point you're really didn't think that bringing up and having a motion to disqualify nathan wade, and fani willis as the da based on what you said was a lack of candor and really intimating line to the court

that that would have an impact on their credibility >> i don't know. i definitely knew that that would have an impact. what i said was that so my goal so that wasn't my goal and it's one of those things as a defense lawyer, when you have information, you sit there and you think if i do not use this, if i don't file this motion, no matter what harm it does to me if i don't file that, am i going to one day beyond the stand testified trying out a post conviction hearing explaining why i had all this information and why i had keast lot of back it up and i didn't file that motion. >> and so >> that's what we're in a position. a lot of folks don't who have never done what we do, who've never done defense work may not understand that when we have this information and mr. bradley called me, give me all this information. >> i followed up on it and i tracked it all down. but once i had all that and i had the case law that supported my arguments, i had a duty to bring that motion. so if i had not done that, i actually would have been deficient in my own performance well, yeah, the judge did not think he met the burden, but vigna big picture for a second. i mean, we all remember this moment when fani

willis, the de held up the paperwork and the motion is actually requested. the motions that she could hold up for you in court. she acute you accused are aligned. she accused you of the same in open court. how do you respond to that? i mean, at the time i >> wasn't the one who was testifying. i very much wish i could've been testifying and so that was difficult because when you're an advocate and you're in court, you're asking the questions, you don't really get the opportunity to testify. and i had to wait until the judge ruled out of fairness until he ruled on the motion before i could actually address those issues. >> but it's it's it's very unfortunate when someone is calling you something and you know, that is not true and you can't really defend herself >> her willis, right >> right. >> well, but she had the opportunity on the stand. she had the opportunity on the stand. she had the ability to bring other evidence if she wanted, she could have brother other evidence and i can tell you if someone was accusing me of having an affair that i wasn't having and i had evidence such as text records such as phone records, such as credit card receipts. you better believe i would have brought that to court >> well, that's interesting

because i might hold you to that. we were talking about whether your own client will take the stand in his own defense because one could argue, if you don't have the burden of proof, you have to do anything to do so, but i'll move on for a second on that point. because you mentioned the word relevance. and for so many people who were looking at this motion and this trial, they got themselves. okay. well, they were leaning in because it was intriguing to say the least, but none of it went to any of the facts alleged in the underlying indictment against the defendants in this case against any of the defendants in this case, including former president, let alone your own client. and it was meant to simply be a way to stall or delay and not have this case be heard before the looming presidential election why do you not want the american people to hear conclusion of this trial before that election? >> i've, i very much would like to go to trial, but the problem is and i think the reason that a lot of the public didn't really understand what was behind this or the reasons for filing this is because they

may not understand the process and our constitution. >> we have a >> right to have a fair and impartial prosecutor evaluate the case. >> that >> happen in this case. >> i saw that the washington post, they reported that the former president donald trump liked your motion, motion so much they hadn't aid as his lawyers see, you've stayed out to call you and congratulate you. is that true? and what was your reaction to that call? >> my reaction to that article >> was very surprised. i was surprised and i don't know who who talked about that >> i >> did not have i didn't have any help. so i think it's important to look back at how this began. this was me, this was not an effort by anyone else. i filed this alone. >> and if you look back at the timeline, i filed this on the deadline that my emotions were due. >> nobody >> joined my motion for well over a week. and you even see donald trump's lawyer in court a few days later saying he had to evaluate whether or not he was leaving and join it. so i think that is clear evidence

that this was not an effort. this was not a an effort by anyone else and so i know that everybody likes to lump all of the defendants together and say, oh, well, this was donald trump's motion or this this was his this is his lawyer or something like that. i represent michael roman. >> that is who >> i represent. that is my duty. and i was the only one that filed this motion. i had help once they all joined and i was very pleased to have the team theme surround me and embrace the motion and embrace all the evidence i had developed but i want to be clear that this was not an emotion filed by anybody else. this was something that i had developed i will give you credit where your credit litigation wise is due and having filed it, but does that mean that we could have helped once you filed it? has any the money that mr. trump has raised for zone defense been used to help pay legal bills for your client, mr. roman no not at all. and that's you know, i >> think that's one of the >> things that i did want to address because it's it's it's been convoluted and i'm certainly not saying that i need to take credit for everything that, you know,

it's all my credit. >> my my response was to your question about whether or not i had assistance from donald trump and from that legal and while i didn't want adversaries or anything like that, i just wanted to make it clear that this was not something that was started by that camp or anything like that. >> well, i hear you, but actually my question was whether the president through an aid contacted you to congratulate you on the motion. did that happen? >> i was congratulated on the unfortunately, i don't know who contacted anyone, so i want to make sure i'm very accurate. i don't know who contacted. i don't know if it was an aid. i don't know who it was, but i did have a lot of people including including people surrounding that organization. definitely reach out to me. i was very surprised at how many people reached out in support and people from all different political path. so that was, that was nice. >> and >> the legal community, atlanta, definitely embraced this. there were a lot of critics, obviously, but most of the critics were not local the

trump call you ashley, that's the question i want you to answer >> and i know i answered that and i said no. i said no and i don't know who it is. and i just wanted to make clear. i don't know who it was, who called someone to call me >> again, what the telephone is verrier right i tried to be very cautious about saying something that's true. >> and that's not true. i do not know who called someone to call me. i received a call in support. yes. but i don't know who originated that call. i don't know who asked anybody to make that call. >> the article that you referred >> to was the first time i'd actually heard that there was an aid involved i didn't know about that before i let you go, ashley and i just want to circle back because this was a very big elephant in the room for many people who are watching this trial. and you referenced the beginning of our conversation that the church speech that fani willis gave, one of your coe defendants through counsel, described it as obviously having been written in advance, playing the race card clearly you do see

that there are more there was more than one other prosecutor on this team aside from nathan wade he is a black man. there have been thought that this was someone who was singled out because of his race that they were questioning his credentials, that they were questioning his professionalism . and a whole number of matters in addition, of course, to the allegations of a relationship is based on a conflict of interest did you or your co-defendants pursue this motion? i'll be very clear with race in mind >> i can't speak for anyone but myself, so i can't speak for any co-defendants, but i know that i did not. and if you look at the facts that's a clear answer nobody would first of all nobody would call me racist. that's just not something that anybody would not just me, which i am not. and i >> understand that and i just >> that was just one of the prefaces. >> but what >> i want to make clear is that

church speech, whether or not there was racial motivation, there was only one prosecutor that was in a relationship with fani willis there was only one prosecutor who was it's making $36,000 a month. there was only one prosecutor who pretty much everyone who knows all of the people in this legal community would say was not typically qualified. >> there was only >> one prosecutor that had never handled or rico case. there was only one prosecutor who was making that much money. so you've got the one prosecutor peter, who's having an affair. you've got the one prosecutor who has never handled or rico case, and you've got the one prosecutor who is making a lot more than all the others. so instead of going over those facts race was brought into it, which clearly had no relevance whatsoever. the other two prosecutors, their bills are very minor the, other two prosecutors are to everybody on both sides of the aisle >> experts. >> they >> have done numbers of rico cases. i mean, john floyd wrote the rico statute in georgia and across i've known her for 20

years. i've known all of these people for 20 years and nobody would say that anna cross or john floyd were not rico, a specialist? >> plus >> their bills were very different than mr. wade's. so one of the things that i think was most striking to me about that church speech was when i heard it the first thing i said, why she lying, why is ms willis lying about how much these people made? john floyd was not paid the same rate as the other two prosecutors. they all had caps on their monthly the bills they were not the same. >> so >> the speech says, oh, this is about race. you're only calling out the one person. there was only one person that was having sex with fani willis. there was only one person that was billing these exorbitant rates. there was only one person that had never tried to rico case that's why that came out. >> well, i hear you on that. the judge of course, did not have any of his experience and qualifications be a part of this particular hearing? he did not deem it to be irrelevant, did not find that you met your burden of proof and eggers, thing. >> i don't >> recall anyone having the direct questions about sex with

with body willis and nathan wade in the same in way you describe it today, but of course, appeal will be had in this instance. and certainly the trial seems to be marching forward with at least one of them remaining. ashleigh merchant. thank you so much for joining today. >> thanks for having me >> we've got some breaking news in right now and appeals court putting that controversial texas immigration law back on hold. this just hours after the supreme court gave the green light we'll talk about what's going on and why next >> space shuttle columbia, the final flight from your sunday, april 7 nine once you demand for energy is growing, and so is the need for american oil and natural gas. it's time to turn the lights america's resources are abundant. our nation is a global leader in reducing emissions and innovators and delivering more

energy sources to secure for our future. nine in ten americans agree american oil and natural gas are vital to our account >> lights >> start your day with nature me. >> the number one >> pharmacist recommended vitamin supplement brand >> so i can take all these trips because priceline has all these amazing deals and that's when i said, deal on your right is our infinity deal. >> i am the deals army. >> 30 or heavy price >> i have moderate to severe crohn's disease. now, they're sky rosie, things are looking afghans him lee control macron's means everything to me >> feel significant symbol dim

relief at four weeks with sky rosie, including less abdominal pain and fewer bowel movements. sky rosie is the first il-13 inhibitor that can deliver remission and visibly proof damage of the intestinal lining. and the majority of people experienced long-lasting remission at one year. >> serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections or a loop we're ability to fight them may occur >> tell your >> dr. if you have an infection or symptoms had a vaccine or plan to liver problems may occur in crohn's disease now it's the time to ask your gastroenterologist how you can take control of your crohn's with sky rosie learn how fe could help you save

>> do you ever worry we wouldn't get you enjoy this >> seriously. he's got the plan great. meanwhile, i'm on the green and all i can think about as all the green, i'm spending on three kids in college. that's mentioned the kitchen remodel and we just we want the the bathrooms last one >> within power. >> i get all my financial >> questions answered, so i don't have to worry, you're like a guru now. >> oh, here join 18 million americans who take control of your financial futonline seller

ship station.com slash trial i can get two months free. >> the privilege of serving you. i do not take lightly, but you all need to be better >> when who are not normal feels like you're telling me that i'm not normal >> and >> it makes me distrust all of you and want you to be dead be better >> being normal >> good legal regime streaming exclusively on macs we have

breaking news just come in tonight. a federal appeals court has just put texas's controversial immigration law back on hold and a brief order, a three-judge panel at the fifth circuit court of appeals has already voted now to wipe away a previous ruling from a different panel on matt circuit court that a temporally but the law into effect three, we now former trump homeland security official, miles taylor mile. so good to see you tonight. first of all, this has been quite the back-and-forth whiplash to say the least, when it comes as immigration law. and by the way, it's controversial because it allowed officials to arrest migrants. and here's the key keyword, suspected of coming into the country illegally, which many looks as a recipe for racial profiling. we think is going on here. the back-and-forth laura you're absolutely right. this has >> been a complete ping pong process. and i want to prepare viewers this is going to continue, but let's jump back in time. so texas passed this

law, sb4, which would have allowed texas police to arrest people, as you noted, who are suspected of being illegal immigrants why is this an extraordinary precedent? they were setting? because historically, it's the us federal government that enforces immigration law article one of the us constitution says that it's the federal government that can naturalized citizens decide whether some, someone becomes a citizen. and as a result, the implication is that the federal government and forces immigration law. it would be very novel for a state to be enforcing federal laws and more than just novel as someone who used to be achieved to staff at dhs, it would be remarkably chaotic and confusing because you imagine scenarios where the federal government and state governments would disagree on the enforcement of the law. and that could lead to flash points. so this of course, went to the courts and then it got paused in the courts. it went up to the supreme court. it just got kicked back down. it got paused again. and laura, i

would predict we are very, very likely to see this end up back in the supreme court, which by the way, did not decide on the merits of the case today, when they made their decision, but they're going to have to eventually because you can bet texas is going to continue to appeal this monday. >> there'll be oral arguments tomorrow. they were already scheduled in the fifth circuit about this very issue. so we'll all watching and see what happens there. and again, this notion of the resource, the urine national security expert, when i think about these issues the resources being devoted in this manner, does that actually undermine the ability to have the national security defense apparatus is at play in working efficiently well, it really does, laura, it puts the state government in conflict with the federal government and look >> two things can be true. you can have the view that this is chaotic legally, and you can also have the view that the

immigration system is broken regardless of your politics and where you stand on this issue, you can hold that opinion that this could be a disaster to enforce, and it's a dangerous precedent to start letting states compete with the federal government on enforcement of federal law leads to lots of problems and down on the ground, again, that could lead to flashpoints between immigration officers that worked for the department of homeland security and people who worked for texas law enforcement. now, if this were to have gone into effect right away, if this pause hadn't happened tonight, i'm sure secretary aly mayorkas, who runs dhs, would have acted like a professional and tried to find a way to work with texas law enforcement. so this didn't get chaotic, but there's no guarantee p of that. and i'm sure the courts are open to those arguments. the biden justice department has really pointed out that this is not a partisan thing, that, that there really is a problem with chain of authority here. if you've got that competition between the federal

and the state government, but laura, this does expose the fact that again, immigration system is very broken and congress's refusal to take action has created this circumstance where texas is now trying to do the federal government's job. and you've got complete uncertainty in the justice system. >> i don't know what you mean. congress has fully functioning, not dysfunctional at all. what do you, what do you mean >> miles about that. i just have no yeah. good point. yeah >> it's totally fine. let me let me turn my attention though because we'll let that rhetorical statement just linger in the ether for a second. okay. >> i want to ask you about >> peter navarro, though the first former white house official to now be imprisoned for a contempt of congress conviction. he came into trump orbit, as you recall, as a trade adviser, he soon became one of trump's lions, but now he seems to be going alagha bit of a lamb. are we starting to see any real consequences for trump and his lieutenants? >> well, i think you absolutely are. and these folks that were really willing to go off the

reservation for donald trump are slowly after several years starting to suffer the consequences. now, i will say in full disclosure, i have a bit of a history with peter navarro after i left the administration he launched a hunt for the person suspected of being anonymous inside the administration, the anonymous critic of the president that happened to be me. but in the meantime, peter navarro's amature hunt resulted in him pointing the finger at a bunch of people who were innocent and had not been criticizing the president and so he has a history of again, going off the reservation, doing things that are going to get him in trouble. of course, in this case, he refused to testify an answer to a subpoena and front of the january 6 select committee, and the courts determined that he had no recourse there. he went through all of his due process he refused to comply with that subpoena and congress has that

authority to call people up as witnesses in these cases. and so he's going to prison because of it. and i think it's a message, laura, to other people in trump's orbit that they are not above the law, that the law is the law. and regardless of their politics they will be held accountable. now he made a defiant speech in front of the court. i think that probably fell on deaf ears. and certainly he might develop different opinions once he reports to the bureau of prisons and he's behind bars, he may indeed, miles taylor and your fabulous hair. thank you for joining us. >> thanks, laura >> no, it was gumming up next major sentences handed down for former mississippi police officers where the audacity to call themselves the goon squad they tortured two black men and one of those men joins me next >> leaks lives, cia secrets valerie valerie plane draw are playing winds were instead >> yes. my children. this is

horrifying >> united states of scandal with jake tapper. new episode so sunday at nine on cnn >> one greetings happen >> yeah, that's not good. happened >> huge things happen david happens with a3, learn more at rnc.com. >> millions of people have lost weight with personalized plans for num, like stephanie, who lost 38 pounds. >> the fact that it truly is just a few minutes a day is life changing your building this foundation to set you up for life. all you have to do is listen get started today and lose 15 pounds and 15 weeks >> jack seasons hunting season for identity thieves, which is why tax fraud was up 30% last year. live lock alerts you and works to fix problems with a dedicated restoration agent, life block, identity theft protection starts here >> the best advice i ever got was to invest with vanguard from my retirement. the second best, stay healthy enough to

enjoy it so i started preparing physically and financially then you came along and made every mile worth it hi, mom >> at vanguard. you're more than just an ambassador urine an owner helping you prepare for today's longer retirement that's the value of ownership >> from meat free monday to sunday so many ways to save life ready while it happy, that's 365 by whole foods market, you should and do that >> what do that? >> it >> means comparing custom quotes from field service professionals or booking an upfront price. see you can find the best price for you, >> get started today that angie stein for news about the new slang t.v. has the same news programming you love starting at $40 a month. it's the same news programming you love starting at $40 a month.

that's what i just said, right? it's less starting at $40 a month saying, well, my dr. gave me breaths tree for my copd. things changed for race treaty, better breathing, symptom improvement, and produced flare-ups. >> registry won't plays a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. >> it is >> not for asthma. tell your dr. if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it, don't take breast treat more than prescribed. rest tree may increase your risk thrush pneumonia and osteoporosis. call your dr. if for some breathing, chest pain, mouth, or tongue swelling, problems, urinating, vision changes, or i paint occur. ask your >> dr. about breaths tree what you doing just buying a car on carbonic. you or not? yeah. >> it's super convenient. already got pre-qualified into minutes >> let's yeah, it is. >> look, i can customize my terms, say the custom down and a monthly payment >> and just like that, my car is getting delivered in a couple of days >> didn't deliver right here,

right here, here, if car shopping made unbelievably and

we'll also send you a bottle of our newest fat burner thermo x absolutely free. >> this situation with wolf blitzer tomorrow with six on cnn tonight. justice for two black men who experienced absolutely harrowing abuse. this at the hands of police officers. it to story that i have brought you here before and it's incredibly difficult to hear, but you must hear it it's about michael jenkins and eddie parker. >> they were tortured by six >> former mississippi officers. those officers called themselves the goon squad of all things. and it happened in january of 2023, just outside jackson, mississippi it started after one of the officers white neighbors said that several black men were staying at a white woman's home. the officers then showed up at the house. >> they >> knocked the door down. and what happened next was nearly two hours of pure horror

jenkins and parker say they were handcuffed they were kicked, they were waterboarded. they were taste, they were called racial slurs. they had milk, alcohol, chocolate port on their faces. officers attempted to sexually assault them the torture culminating when one of the officers actually shoved a gun in jenkins mouth as part of a mock execution and ended up firing the bullet, lacerated his tongue and broke his jaw jenkins told me last year he's lucky to be alive >> i was i was looking for him. i do that my time. i it comes to at the bag of money. i probably been de if i wouldn't have been looking, i'm right. do today that former officer who shot michael jenkins was sentenced to 20 years in prison a second officer gotten more than 17 years. the others will

be sentenced in the coming days. they pleaded guilty last august to a combined 13 felonies and connect section two, the torture and abuse. eddie parker, one of the victims, joins me now. i'm gonna put attorneys malik, shabazz and trent walker. thank you so much for being your eddy. i remember when you and i met last year, i could not believe what you had endured. i could not believe what michael had endorsed and yet here we are sentencing day, at least for one this man, hunter elward he got 20 years. jeffrey middleton got more than 17. eddie, how are you feeling tonight about these sentences? >> i'm not feel satisfied with the widow the way since five

outcome nearly two decades in prison for at least one nearly two, that gets for another. i mean, there was i understand a dramatic moment inside the courtroom today when hunter elward turn to you guys and said he was sorry, man, i don't know what that word must have meant to you in that moment, but you responded in a way that i think might surprise people. you forgave him. >> why? >> it wasn't it wasn't for the sour. it wasn't worth for anything. they the same i could >> it >> was a felony members there was me i do feel by april's regard with giving me that i had to do that it gives not so much for him, but for myself and for my it was it was something that we didn't even talk about, but it the end, but it was something that was a

real appreciate thankful for live with what went over, you know no. no no. >> i guess let's say remote for our self because we were the one that >> what an extraordinary person you are to have that forgiveness within you and to have that self-awareness to know, but you were unwilling to carry the burden of that. >> his guilt >> with yourself, but still, i mean, i just i'm so unbelievably i'm moved by that. lelet me let me ask you a leak because i want to play for a moment what hunter elward parents said to our own ryan young outside of court today, listen to this he couldn't live with me more them as well the

only healing starts. >> when you tell the truth why was it important for your son to trump >> because that's the only way he could heal. he he was torn apart by what had happened that night he knew that wasn't new what happened to those two gentlemen, he cannot live with anymore >> when you hear this officers father talk about the officers healing journey and i wonder what your reaction is to that my reaction is true, reflect on the fact that hunter elward >> whose waist about too much and 70 pounds and in july of 2021, he had his knee in the back of damian cameron, while louk stickman, another rankin county officer had his knee on damian, karen's neck and damian cameron is dead my mind goes back to a month before this happened, and hunter elward was with christian

dedmon and they abuse another person named adam smith to the extreme that they say elward was there and allow christian dedmon took to pull his pants down and put his prime hi good parts in the face of another victim that l will have to plead guilty to. crimes against also. >> and >> then so it wasn't just this incident, it was elward has a career of abuse >> my >> personal opinion is that hunter elward was sorry, because he got caught and if he hadn't got caught, he would be abusing and killing today but i understand totally that trump and that mr. parker has been through and how he has to has to be able to release i understand that. but i believe that hunter elward he's he's he's glad he's off of the streets. is very dangerous. and i'm happy that justice has come to him and so that's my

perspective on hunter elk my goodness, i see both of you, gentlemen, malik and also trend embracing a different points in time eddie you have watched this trauma from a it's unfortunate. front row seat and you know, between these camera moments in between these courtroom experiences, we're talking about two human beings men tortured and tormented in the way they are. and i hope that no one takes for granted, even for a second, trend. >> what >> this trauma has been like for these men and just hearing the statements of lake trend, we could be at the beginning of a federal investigation into the patterns and practices of the rankin county sheriff department. how do you see this moving forward?

>> with words own statements about the culture of violence that existed at the department for the seven years that he was a deputy there and statement that you could not work on that night shift? without being part and parcel or at least condoning the violence that went on. >> are those >> perpetrated by the goon squad. so this was not an isolated incident. i think that it's certainly been documented at this time that this is something that has gone on with about 20 years of documented cases >> if i can ask you and i don't want to talk around you because you and your experience, you in michael's has shown quite a light on what has happened here, and i thank you for bringing your pain to

the world because we can learn from, and we can act on it if you could say anything to these officers there are more sentences to be doled out this week. what would it be >> it was never before you do the fight the truth so what transpired of the same, you what trad to, tryst was the truth. so don't take what you didn't like. his thousand depends where the keypads only healing is joining us and i'm so glad >> to know that you know enough not to carry their sentences on your own back. edie parker.

thank you so much. and, gentlemen, thank you for joining us. we're thinking of michael as well. >> thank you. like you >> we'll be right back >> sanity needs a safe space >> you have a show. were right and left talk to each other >> cnn presents presents an encore presentation of hbo's real time with bill maher, saturday at eight on cnn >> one bbs was to turbotax >> i broke four generations of family tradition >> i want to make perfume so i mean barbers, new psyche count by guaranteeing her maximum refund intuit's turbotax >> my cry >> thank you

>> covid-19. i'm not waiting. >> if it's covid packs love it, packs little bit is an oral treatment for adults with mild to moderate covid-19 at a high risk factor for becoming severe, it does not prevent covid-19. >> my symptoms are mild now but i'm not risking it if it's covid packs loaded packs loaded must be taken within the first five days of symptoms and helps stop the virus from multiplying in your body, taking pecs little bit with certain medicines can lead to serious or life-threatening side effects or affect how id or other medicines work, including hormonal birth control is critical to tell your dr. about all medicines you take, because certain tests or changes in their dosage may be needed. tell your dr. if you have kidney or liver problems hiv-1 are planned to become pregnant or breastfeed, don't take packs, love it. if you're allergic to normal my 12-year ritonavir or any of its ingredients serious side effects can include allergic reactions, some severe like

anaphylaxis and liver problems. these are not all the possible side effects. so talk to your dr. commercially insured patients may pay as little as $0 and the us government is making packs lovin available to medicare, medicaid, and uninsured patients for free. terms and conditions apply to both programs. learn more at packs low bid.com slash paxos, and ask your dr. today. >> and if it's covid packs lovin in this market, you'll find fisher investments is different than other money managers. different. how are we all just looking for the hottest stocks? >> nope, we use diversified strategies to position our clients portfolios for their law long-term goals. >> do you still sell investments and generate high commissions for you, right now? >> we don't sell commission products were a fiduciary obligated to act in our client's best interest >> so when did you make more money? only when your clients make more money? >> yep. >> we do better when our clients do better at fisher investments were clearly different choosing a treatment for your chronic migraine 15 or more headache days a month each lasting four hours or more can

be overwhelming. so ask your dr. about botox dots prevents headaches and adults with chronic migraine before they even start the number one prescribed branded chronic migraine treatment. so far more than 5 million botox treatments have been given two, over 850,000 chronic migraine patients >> effects of botox it may spread hours two weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. alert your dr. right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness can be signs of a life-threatening condition, side effects may include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue, and headache. don't receive botox if there's a skin infection, tell your dr. your medical history muscle or nerve conditions and medications including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects >> in a survey, 92% of current users said they wish they talk to their dr. in started botox sooner. so ask your dr. if botox is right for you learn how adds he could help you save on botox. >> i love your dress >> i splurged a little because

liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. >> that's great. >> i know. right. i've been telling everyone did you hear that tika set her first word? good you say mama never >> can you say on >> how many people did you tell? >> only pay for what you need >> lucky vegas store, you've sin city sunday at ted on cnn >> the ball donald trump's legal cases, you may be surprised learning is filed another lawsuit, or maybe actually you won't be surprised. >> this one his against abc news and anchor at george steph monopolists for defamation and the allegation san from interview on their sunday morning show. this week with republican congresswoman nancy mace earlier this month. mays, who's spoken publicly about being raped at the age of 16, endorsed donald trump for president, said for anomalous, pushed mace over that

endorsement, given that trump has been found liable for sexual abuse you have endorsed donald trump for president donald trump has been found liable for rape by a jury. donald trump has been found liable for defaming the victim of that rape by a jury. it's been affirmed by a judge >> them court case number one. number two i live with shame and you're asking me a question about my political choices, trying to shame me as a rape victim, i find it disgusting the abc news declined to comment on the lawsuit to cnn. you will recall that trump was sued for defamation by e. jean carroll, who accused him of sexually assaulting her in the 1990s, a jury unanimously found trump sexually abused carroll, and ultimately awarded her almost $90 million for battery and defamation joining me now is trial attorney can her kel, who has tried a number of high-profile cases including whole kogan case against gocher and sarah payloads, libel case

against the new york times can always a pleasure to see you and i want to pick your brain here because this lawsuit takes issue with the use of the word rape writing. i'll read here. he is repeated statement that plaintiff was found liable for rape were false intentional malicious, and designed to cause harm. trump was found liable for sexual abuse. does this rise the level of defamation in your mind? >> laura, thanks for having me. it's always a pleasure. >> the >> your trial lawyer and you see the jury interrogatory and it says, did she prove by a preponderance of the evidence cities liable for rape. and it says no that's very clear. it's it's not something subject to interpretation as far as someone repeat feeding it over and over again. it's a provably false statement. he was not found liable for rape on that verdict form now, where it gets a little different, particularly in a public figure case, is whether it's tour

steph, an awful less when he makes these statements is making them knowledge that falsity, or are we in this world of a contextual semantic issue, where most states don't really have a rape law. most states called sexual assault or sexual battery. there are states it's still able, including new york. and in that respect, do we really have provable falsity or is it substantially true? because if you're listening to that in florida we don't have a rape statue. when you say rape, it means sexual battery or sexual assault. and you do have a finding in the verdict form of sexual abuse, i think or sexual assault so when you say, is it defamation? well, george steph annapolis certainly knows the verdict form does not say libel for rate, but there's a clear note check there. i mean, you can't get around the fact that that's objective. but what i would assume they're going to defend with is saying to a regular common man listening to that a comment person listening to that what is the word rate

mean and did he say it with that kind of context or did he mean as a term of art as it would have read on the jury form, does it does that resonate? we're gonna get into sort of a semantic fight about it. and i think it's probably a good defense. >> what about the actual malice aspect you mentioned a public figure in particular. i mean, obviously donald trump is a public figure, maybe as a president, the quintessential one they don't get more public night at the end of the day. we've got to prove either the statement was utter with actual knowledge or falsity or reckless disregard that goes back to the simplest version. this case at first glance we looked at it kind of liked it in the sense that what are you going to say the verdict form says he wasn't found liable for rape you're repeating this over and over. i mean, he would not like go on a terminology, but the question is, as he saying that is he meaning rape as a term of are under new york statutes or is he referring to the other part of the verdict where there was a finding of

sexual abuse or assault and, i think didn't in a public figure case that can be a fairly interesting issue. it's been used before that defense that would call it a substantially true defense, right? i think judge kaplan actually address that at some point with respect to whether that difference in verbage meant anything substantively, right >> so i would tell you at the very basic level though he had to have known that the verdict form did not say he was found liable for rape because it's clear there's complicated verdict interrogatory there. it's one line >> so i can tell you this. the case might for some people look very cut and dry, but as you know, defamation actions can be very nuanced. you specialize as in part, in them as well. so i'm talking to the expert in that particular area, so thank you for being with me tonight, but you know, this is not the end of it. we'll have to talk again because this is going to have some legs. so when you

think kanter cow i definitely think it presents a different issues. i was a little fast. any the question is, does it stay in florida? and what do you do about donald trump as a libel proof plaintiff, which to me maybe the more fascinating argument there >> well, another de will talk about that soon. cantor cal as always. thank you so much. >> good senior, laura. thank you for having me >> and thank you all for watching. our coverage continues >> there is no media personality businesswoman >> celebrity chef, like her >> many lives of martha stewart now streaming on macs kevin bought the team. >> i'll put it on my chase freedom on limited >> color, and i'm a cashback on a few other things too dark with the sale system from deep, that's step one more thing.

the team owner gets five minutes again hey, rose, i like it. i break the clay back like a pro would chase freedom and limits. how do you catch that jason? make more of what yours? >> now, adt professionally installed, google nest products. >> cool. >> you're all set, so your home is safe and smarter. >> we're gonna ms >> you can check it on your home or ms system, they should go manage your system from virtually anywhere get intelligent alerts, like what a package has arrived are the most trusted name and home security as the intelligence of google, you have a home with no worries brought to you by adt, my psoriasis was all of them psoriatic arthritis who knew there could be for me consent search works on both because syntax helps real people find clear skin and in psoriatic arthritis can be less joint pain and help stop further joint damage. series reactions, severe skin reactions that look like eczema and an increased

risk of infections, some fatal have occurred. tell your dr. if you have an infection or symptoms had a vaccine or plan to for advice bd symptoms develop or worsen >> when these business owners need cash fast, they turned to bids to credit to fund what's next from fitness studios to medical offices and every small business in-between. >> we've got you covered whether you need new equipment, funds to expand or need money to cover unforeseen business expenses, bus to credit is the trusted partner for your small business funding needs. scan the code on your screen now or go to biz to credit.com to apply this to credit funding. what's next? >> i'm going to kill man and destroy everything he holds

>> no >> man. >> and the lost kingdom repeated 13. now streaming exclusively on macs >> so would you get to nashville hot tenders and three mandarin orange tenders >> what about you >> three classic tenders? >> for but a flash ramp for the current at our when know, always the