vision insurance doesn't do you any good if you don't use it. just like this treadmill i bought, that i keep saying that i'll use... but never do. yeah. put your vision insurance to good use. get 50% off your second pair. book an exam today. ♪ ♪ howard: the media are on high

alert here in washington. it was the day the house was going to vote on green lighting the impeachment probe of president biden. it happened to be the day that hunter biden was supposed to show up urn subpoena to testify behind closed doors. suddenly, the cable news networks were throwing out banners, unclear whether hunter biden will testify. and, boom, there was the president's son who had insisted on testifying in public talking to reporters. >> for six years i've been the target of unrelenting trump attack machine shouting where's hunter. well, here's my answer: i am here. in the depths of my addiction, i was extremely irresponsible with my finances. but to suggest that is grounds for an impeachment inquiry is beyond the absurd. it's shameless. howard: so hunter was using the media mob to try to turn the tables on the republican

committee and make the case that he was ready to testify before the cameras knowing full well the panel had rejected the offer. and for all this talk about transparency, hunter biden took no questions. i'm howard kurtz and this is "mediabuzz." ♪ ♪ howard: turnings out hunter biden had hid say and so did jim comer, the oversight chairman, while being pressed by washington post reporter and msnbc contributor jackie alem if eni. >> republicans do not want an open process where americans can see their tactics. >> chairman comer, do you acknowledge that you have the answer to that question, that you found no evidence of wrongdoing or -- >> we've found some very serious evidence that -- >> but joe biden -- >> no, no, no, there's two checks to joe biden -- you asked a question. >> loan repayments --

>> you don't understand like i do. [inaudible conversations] >> biden's attorneys of -- >> but the law firm that represented all -- >> the law firm money. >> that represented all the show ponies. >> you think those lawyers -- >> what do you think? you're defending them. >> so if republicans have a bunch of false facts, why didn't hunter walk into congress and set the facts straight? hunter just read a speech his lawyer wrote and went to lunch. >> while republicans are focused on exacting revenge for, i don't know, something, they're failing to do actual critical national security kind of work. >> a sob story on capitol hill today. hunter biden wants you to know that he's a poor, helpless victim of what is a new, vast right-wing conspiracy and that neither he nor if his father should ever be held accountable. >> there has been no evidence yet presented, none whatsoever. this is about donald trump next year not wanting to be the only candidate on the ballot who's

been been impeached. howard: by day's end, all 221 republicans said yes to impeach impeachmentings all democrats saying no. joining us now in, jason chaffetz, former republican congressman and fox news contributor, and here with me, lucy e caldwell, strategist and adviser to renew democracy. jason, much in the need ya -- media are playing it down, moving on quickly, insisting there's no evidence. is the press, in your view, playing defense for joe biden? enter yeah. they lack the intellectual curiosity to actually question why were these 20 llks -- llcs set up? what did hunter biden do to deserve millions of dollars that went into the accounts of the immediate family members of joe biden? this is not an impeachment inquirely of hunter biden, it's an inquiry of owe biden because he does appear compromised.

they're stonewalling. they won't provide documents ors, answer questions, make people in the administration available, and the house was left with no other option other than an impeachment inquiry. it strengthens their legal hand. howard: i was really surprise surprised the next day just looking at the biden impeachable story being the eighth or ninth down, and in the last couple of days, you need a microscope to find it. lucy, not saying anything's been proven, but how can the media so easily dismiss if an impeachment inquiry? >> i'm actually not quite sure what case you're making here, because if, in fact, i think an impeachment inquiry by republicans against joe biden is going to really, really help joe biden in 2024. so if the media were carrying water for joe and hunter biden on this particular story, i have to say i think that they would be covering this from the rooftops -- howard: why will it help joe biden? >> it helps because these impeach if. inkauaily or -- impeachment

inquiries actually warm a president's base to him. we saw that in both trump impeachments. there's also the problem, i think, in this particular impeachment that there does not seem to be a there there. muppetter biden is a person -- hunter biden is a person with addiction, perhaps with mental illness. it's a sad story. joe biden did things as a father. but the reality is i think this impeachment inquiry is actually going to cause a lot of americans to see their own story in the story of the bidens. obviously, with the caveat that they're a powerful family with more resources. but it's the experience of trying to help a loved one who's really struggling. howard: well, joe biden how old not have gotten on calls with hunt or biden's business partners. >> agreed. howard: there are things that they've kind of moved the goalposts. jason, hunter biden rips the republicans, he's saying i'm here, i'm ready to testify, knowing that the house committee had already said there's no way. the subpoena calls for informing something else.

it was political theater. was it aeffective? >> no, absolutely not. i mean, he's thumbing his nose at the committee. imagine if he'd showed up through a judge and said, hey, i'm not going to come in the courtroom, i'm going to have a press conference. you'd be thrown in vail for doing that. you know, when they issued subpoenas on the trump kids, they showed up and testified for hours. that's the law. that's what you're posed to do. the idea that you were available, you were on campus, you were over on the senate side, and hunter biden goes out and says i'm here, i'm available, well, you have to do a deposition. that's the rules. that is the law. that is what you have to do. it's not optional to show up. and it strengthened the vote, by the way, in the house later that afternoon to actually do the impeachment inquiry. they demonstrated they're not going to provide the witnesses, they're not going to provide the documents, they're going to highed everything that they can, and the house has to be able to do its job. howard: hunter did go to the senate side of the capitol because theoretically he could been avested -- arrested if he

went to the house side. did hunter biden succeed in generating sympathetic coverage? >> i think he probably did because i think that what a he put on display was the fact that the committee doesn't want him to testify in public. and i think that americans like sunlight. americans like transparency. americans, just as they probably want to see these documents, also are interested in seeing hunter biden testify publicly. howard: but do you think this stunt helped him in. >> i don't think the press conference was as glitzy or -- howard: it wasn't a press conference. >> that's fair. was it as effective as it could have been? i don't know. but i think hunter biden using his own voice e and developing a initiative -- narrative of hunter being out there in the open, yes, i think that will help him, and i think it will help his father. howard: i bet jasoning has a different view, but i want to play a sound bite because speaker mike johnson first authorized this impeachment inquiry on his open, and now he's come back and gotten house approval which is an important

thing. but here is what mike johnson as a congress congressman said back in 2019. >> the founders of this country warned against a single-party impeachment for good reason will be. they feared that it would bit or arely and perhaps if irreparably divide our nation. howard: so, jason, one-party impeachments are fine, are terrible, i should say, when donald trump is a target, but for joe biden not so much? >> well, they haven't impeached him yet. this was a vote to do the inquiry, to two get the evidence -- to go get the we've. evelyn:ed, subpoena the bank records, to do all of that. you have to be able to do the investigative record, and the reason you have to do that is because you have irs officials who are demonstrating and documenting that they were this warrantedded by the department of justice to actually do their jobs. the department of justice should have done this years ago, but they didn't do it. and when the irs whistleblowers, highly credible, came in and said we weren't allowed to do

all these things, only the house can do that. so we'll see where it goes, but this is not an impeachment. it's an inquiry to get the ed. >> yeah. i want to remind someone when we're talking about one-party impeachment, we mean do members of another party cross over to participate with the party that's -- howard: right. >> in both of the trump impeachments, that did happen. in the impeachment -- howard: it was relatively few. >> ten republicans, back to the trump impeachment, ten house republicans, the highest number ever in an impeachment of a president of their own party and, in fact, the 2019 impeachment there also was crossover because justin amash, who had become an independent, he supported the impeachment. and, news flash, justin amash is not a democrat. and he would be very offended. yes, the inquiry is different, but i think this is a completely different animal. howard: well, could the impeachment inquiry, jason, which ultimately has to lead on some kind of vote to proceed or

not proceed with articles against the president, end energize the republican base or is there some chance it could backfire? >> if they step too far, anything could backfire. but i, to suggest this is going to rally democrats, i mean, i guess the hard core democrats are going to say, oh, yeah, but look how joe biden has moreoverred on his answer. i've never had a conversation, and now it's morphed time after time, never involved in the business, now he's saying he wasn't financially involved in the business. but there are tens of millions of dollars that went into the pocket of the immediate family members of joe biden. $100,000 went into the bank account of his grand kids as a thank you for referring business to get into romania. so come on. america's going to wake up to this even though the traditional, standard media is not proper orally reporting it. -- properly reporting it. it should be front page day

after day. howard: well, i think the media have somehow decided that this is not a big story. but, of course, as the inquiry goes on, that may change. there are unanswered questions, absolutely. but, lucy, hunter biden, we seem to be talking about him more and more. he's got this counterpunching strategy now, but he'sal under indictment on -- also under indictment on tax charges, on gun charges. is he hurting his father? inevitably, at the very least it's a distraction, correct? >> i don't think hunter biden should be elected if president in 2024, howie. we should not elect hunter biden president. yes, it is a distraction. republicans are succeeding in making this a distraction d. howard: you're throwing him under the bus. >> hunter biden is not the case. hunter biden is not the candidate. [laughter] would he have gotten these kinds of contracts from burisma, these kind of -- without the entree of being joe biden's son? no, of course not. should joe biden have taken calls with hunter biden's business associates?

no, obvious not. do those kinds of activities which seem like poor judgment calls mount to something that would justify an impeachment? we're going to learn. and i think what everyone will see is, no, they also do not. howard: well, we will see. hunter biden, obviously, could wind up in jail with these felony indictments. let me get a break here. when we come back, harvard's president keeps her job despite her disastrous testimony ab anti-semitism, and some journalists are making the debate racial. new. ♪ a ♪ b miralax works naturally with the water in your body to help you go... ...free your gut. and your mood will follow. for 8 grams of fiber, try new mirafiber gummies. theo's nose was cause for alarm, so dad brought puffs plus lotion to save it from harm. puffs has 50% more lotion and brings soothing relief. don't get burned by winter nose. a nose in need deserves puffs indeed. america's #1 lotion tissue.

>> tech: when you get a chip in your windshield... trust safelite. ♪ upbeat, catchy music ♪ >> tech vo: this couple counts on their suv... as they travel for their small business. so when they got a chip in their windshield... they brought it to safelite... for a same-day in-shop repair. we repaired the chip right away. and with their insurance, it was no cost to them. >> woman: really? >> tech vo: plus, to protect their glass, we installed new wipers too. that's service the way you need it. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪

goli, taste your goals.

goli, taste your goals. goli, taste your goals. howard: growing criticism of harvard for hanging on to its embattled president claudine gay e the spite her abysmal house system next -- testimony last week where she ducked and dodged questions about whether the school would condemn the mass

murder of je jews. >> does that speech not call for the genocide of jews and the elimination of israel? >> we embrace a commitment to free expression and give a wide beth to free expression even of views that are objectionable. howard: jason, given claudine g if ay's awful testimony that day, refusing to condemn anti-semitism for which she apologized the very next day, are the media a right in criticizing the decision by her harvard pals to keep her on? >> it is shocking to me that she continues to be the president. keep in mind this testimony before congress is like an open book test. you have a week to prepare, you can take all the notes that you want and put them right in front of you. you have you have about three hours to get your testimony right, and then the next day you've got if to come out and a apologize? if i mean, how incompetent are you? this is a huge issue, and she couldn't get it right.

are you going to kill je e ws? are you okay with people saying you're going to commit genocide? and she says she's okay with that? if because of the context? it's just stunning that she's still there -- howard: she talked about the context. i don't think she said she was okay with it -- >> yeah, the context. howard: she certainly didn't take any opportunity to condemn it. nikole hannah-jones says this is not really about anti-semitism, this is to further their propaganda cam poem against racial equity. he's the sound bite. here's the sound bite. >> it's laughable to think that the first ever black woman following that unbroken line of white racial quotas is the one who's unquaffed. -- unqualified. howard: so she's playing the race card? >> well, i think other people are. bill ackman, who has become a twitter sensation over this issue, a hem funder with ties -- hedge funder, said that harvard's decision to retain claudine gay was reflective of

sort of insular ivory tower protectionism. offing, claudine gay is a historic figure in harvard's history, the first black woman president. so i think arguably while i'm not in agreement with everything else nikole hannah-jones said, i think, arguably, it's a reaction to that kind of talking point. howard: well, i don't think nicole used any bones about it. she used words like race and first black president. one thing that got a huge amount of attention was this "saturday night live" skit that that made republican elise stefanik the issue. take a quick look. >> yeah, is calling for the genocide of j jews against the code of conduct for harvard? >> well, it depends on the context. >> what? that can't be your answer. oh, my god. howard: jason, the university presidents sitting there as portrayed by "saturday night live," they were portrayed as a kind of a bit confused, maybe not with it, very mild

criticism. and yet you beat up on the congresswoman who's asking legitimate questions. >> yeah. you know, "saturday night live" has put out some quality material lately, that wasn't one of them. [laughter] that was really bad. i think they really wanted to go after it, but they didn't nail it. it was offensive to a lot of people. this is a serious issue. we're talking about a people's lives. there's plenty of material to go out and joke around, but that was not one of them. howard: lucy, snl was mocking elise stefanik, as we just saw, as an out of control nut ifjob, but she asked questions that any competent lawmaker of either party, i believe, would ask. >> i don't think it's about how elise asked the questions, i think it's -- about the questions, it's how she asked them. the questions repeatedly were yes or no, yes or no, yes or no -- howard:s because she couldn't get get e an answer. she couldn't get a straight answer. [laughter] >> i think what is missing in this conversation is you can

both take issue with how elise stefanik arranged these questions and take issue with how the university presidents showed up. they were prepared by lawyer, not by comms people -- howard: yeah. great legal advice, by the way. really helped. [laughter] >> prepare with co america m people with a lawyer in the lead, not with lawyers as the lead on the preparation. but the thing we're not talking about that is important here, and i think groups like the foundation for legal rights and expression have been very good on this. yes, we should have a discussion about censorship on college campuses, but we should not say, you know what? in this case it just shows we need more censorship. is censorship and criticism of university presidents in the past was wrong, let's form policies that would work for all of us in all of these situations. howard: i reject the notion that this was just a republican crusade because lots of democrats spoke out in very harsh terms against these university presidents. pennsylvania, for example, the democratic governor and senator john fetterman essentially called for the resignation of

penn president elizabeth ma a gill who was forced out of her job unlike the president of harvard. jason chaffetz, lucy caldwell, thanks for joining us. up next, we'll to to israel where joe biden is openly criticizing the netanyahu government and congress still paralyzed over aid to a ukraine. ♪ ♪ new neuriva ultra. unlike some others, it supports 7 brain health indicators, including mental alertness from one serving. to help keep me sharp. try new neuriva ultra. think bigger. lactaid is 100% real milk, just without the lactose. delicious too. just ask my old friend, kevin. nothing like enjoying a cold one while watching the game. who's winning? we are, my friend. we are.

my a1c was up here; now, it's down with rybelsus®. his a1c? it's down with rybelsus®. my doctor told me rybelsus® lowered a1c better than a leading branded pill and that people taking rybelsus® lost more weight. i got to my a1c goal and lost some weight too. rybelsus® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis.

gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. need to get your a1c down? you may pay as little as $10 per prescription. howard: president biden is ratcheting up his criticism of bibi netanyahu's government saying world opinion is turning against israel for its, quotes, indiscriminate bombing in gaza. >> the actions they're taking must be consistent with attempting to do everything possible to prevent innocent palestinian civilians from being hurt, murdered, killed, lost, etc. howard: joining us now from israel is fox news correspondent trey yingst. trey, president biden being increasingly public and critical of bibi netanyahu for doing

little to nothing to lower the civilian casualties in gaza. the media say about half the bombs being dropped are unguided dumb bombs. isn't it dangerous for israel to be so pluckily at odds -- publicly at odds with its chief ally? >> reporter: yeah, howie, absolutely. when you look at the situation on the ground, or there is real distance between the americans and the israelis about how to conduct this operation inside if gaza. the israelis have faced pressure not just from the united states, but from the international community as a whole about their operation against hamas inside the strip. when you talk to officials here, they say israel is at war with hamas, not the palestinian people, but the reality on the ground is there are more than 2 million palestinians inside gaza that are in desperate need of aid, medical spry supplies and now housing. you've seen biden administration firms over the past 72 hours, national security adviser jake sullivan, tomorrow lloyd austin will be meeting with the defense minister, and they'll be having

conversations about when this phase of the war will be over. howard: right. trey, when hamas terrorists obviously put their own palestinian people in jeopardy by embedding in it's schools or hospitals or other places, is biden right that the humanitarian crisis in gaza is hurting the israelis in terms of world opinion? >> reporter: he's absolutely right. and it's an uncomfortable truth about this conflict. there are thousands of civilians dying as part of the campaign against a maas -- hamas inside gaza. but when you talk to the israelis, they say, look, there are still more than 100 hostages held inside the strip, so they're going to do everything possible to go after hamas leadership and try to's rescue the hostages still inside gaza. the pressure is expected to increase over the coming weeks and months as the defense minister here indicated this will be a several-months war. but one thing to note here, the americans are putting pressure on the israelis to end what they are calling the most active phase of the war and lower the

intensity inside gaza and shift to more focused raids against hamas inside the strip. howard: right. and accidentally killing three israeli hostages certainly didn't help. let me switch to ukraine, and let's take a listen to president biden and president zelenskyy. >> holding ukraine funding hostage in an attempt to force through an extreme republican partisan agenda on the border is not how it works. >> and also in europe we say for our freedom and yours. howard: you covered the war in ukraine. obviously, the aid to ukraine is held up by domestic political dispute about stricter immigration restrictions at the border. finish -- how difficult a position will ukraine be in this drags on? >> reporter: the ukrainians will be in an incredibly difficult position. they're already in one right now. there is the a real understanding on the ground in ukraine according to soldiers that we've talked to just returning from the front lines

and also officials in kyiv that if american support doesn't get there quick enough, they will lose more and more territory to the russians. they are running low on artillery shells, they are in very difficult scenarios on both the southern and eastern front, and the russians at this point show no sign of letting up their campaign against this annex if sayings of ukrainian territory. ofhillhill. howard: right. trey, we always appreciate your reporting from israel. thanks for joining us. next on media a was, rudy giuliani hits concern gets hit with massive damages, and the political rhetoric getting tougher as we head toward the iowa caucuses.dese ♪ (dad) no way they'd take this wreck. (carolers) ♪ yes, they will, in any condition. ♪ ♪ get iphone 15 pro and ipad and apple watch - all on them! ♪ (mom) please forgive him. (carolers) ♪ it's all good - just a little awkward. ♪ (soloist) think we'll wrap this up. (vo) it's your last chance to turn any iphone in any condition into a new

iphone 15 pro with titanium and ipad and apple watch se - all on us. that's up to $1700 in value. only on verizon.

howard: rudy giuliani backed out of testifying at his own trial where two former or georgia election workers were suing him for defamation. they say they were devastated by his lies and dehuged with death threats. giuliani's own lawyer said the

women were wrong, but during a break the one-time mayor spoke to reporters and repeated his original accusations. >> i told the truth. they were engaged in changing votes. >> there's no proof of that. >> you're damn right there is. howard: the jury verdict ordered giuliani to pay a staggering $148 million in damages. >> i have no doubt that my comments were made, and they were supportable and are supportable today. i just did not have an opportunity to present the evidence that we offered. howard: joining us now, byron york, chief political correspondent for "the washington examiner" and fox news contributor. and in san diego, laura fink. it's not true that rudy couldn't offer evidence but, obviously, he can't pay $148 million. he's broke. what was the point? this was a trial only about damages of such an astronomical

figure. >> well, there are two issues, there's the defamation and then there's the award. and i don't think there's any doubt that he did defame the two people who sued him. now, what's going on here is you have to remember the lawyers for moss and freeman actually asked for $48 million in damages. howard: right. >> now, the washington, d.c. jury went into the room and said why don't we make it $48 million. -- 1488 million. now, or it's obviously a crazy, excess i award. but you remember, donald trump is saying that he cannot get a fair trial in front of a district of columbia jury. and i think this will probably end up being exhibit a in his case going forward. howard: yeah. the fact that-three times the size of what the plaintiffs asked for is really something, laura, and their lawyer did say send a message. i guess that's the message, an expensive one. you know, i've known rudy giuliani for decades, covered his first mayoral campaign, his presidential campaign, and it's a classic rise and fall, sadly,

for america's mayor. >> well, i think he did this to himself and continues to do it to himself. and i think what we're talking about here not just -- we've seen courts, i should say, across the country in various cases levy punitive damages far exceeding that that the lawyers request. so this is not unusual. however, what they wanted to see was accountability. they wanted to see accountability for the statements of, baseless statements accusing these two public servants of passing usb ports like, quote, vials of heroin or cocaine, these racist undertones led to their being confronted with nooses and torches at their workplace, being driven out of their homes, being -- receiving death threats to themselves ask and fair -- their family. i mean, the punitive damages were to send a message that words matter and defamation matters. howard: yeah. they say they were passing candy. and yet we have these from the two clips, or giuliani talking to reporters going back, even

though this had already been decided, to, oh, no, they were stealing ballots. >> i don't know why he did that. howard: yeah. >> you know, the classic giuliani line in the whole post-election controversy was in arizona where with he told one of the officials there we've got a lot of theories. what we need is the evidence. and he still hasn't produced that. and a lot of republicans believed there was something fishy about the 2020 election, but there has never been the ed shown that it would -- evidence shown that it would have changed in these states including georgia. howard: right. again, his own lawyer says these two election workers who wound up quitting their jobs and going into hiding for a while did not commit any kind of fraud. he was just trying to minimize rudy giuliani's role. >> well, and obviously failed to do that. and the fact that rudy giuliani couldn't testify when he was claiming that he had all of this evidence, i think, was a strategic move and probably a good one even in the face of this verdict by his attorneys. rudy giuliani has come a long way from writing a book where he

told people not to bully and to be aware of punching down, and yet here he is. so this is a man who has made his own bed, and he is expected the lie in it. howard: right. let's turn to the campaign where we have some tougher rhetoric from everybody. we have a little hon montage for you. roll it. >> if trump loses, he will say it's stolen no matter what, absolutely. he will try to delegitimize the results. >> you know, anti-trumpers don't think i hate trump enough. >> yeah. that's true. >> pro-trumper or es don't think i love trump enough. so the media loves to sit there and say you're not hating him enough or you're not loving him enough. >> ron desanctimonious is at less than 19, and haley is at 16. what happened to the heally -- haley surge? howard: so, byron, ron desantis whose superpac chief just quit last night and a bunch of resignations and firings, he seems to be going increasingly hard on donald trump. but for months he kind of let

trump use him as a punching bag. would the race look any different if he had from the outset gone after the former president? >> i don't think so. i don't think any republican candidate has found the secret sauce in dealing with donald trump. and maybe there isn't one, because trump is running sort of as a de facto uncouple bent -- howard: right. >> and the numbers in this new fox news poll this morning which just came out nationally, trump 699, desantis 12 -- 69, haley,9 and these are not out of line with other polls as well. howard: yes, they're national polls, but those are stunning numbers. yeah. laura, we also have, you know, nikki haley getting a lot of attention, the haley surge and so forth which you just saw the former president mock. i'm wondering, you know, she's put all her chips on new hampshire, desantis on iowa. is there a real race here, or are journalists, do they just like covering one? >> well, i think one of the data points we need to look at is the

fact that for those voters for whom trump is not their first choice, he is their second choice, which means that there isn't a lot of room for growth for all of these other candidates. and i do think the media would like a primary. i don't think we really have a viable one. nikki haley moves up a little bit in polls, and it's a surge. ron deap disloses some -- desantis loses some ground and he's flailing. the fact of the matter is you may see some noses change hands, but it's ultimately going to have the same result, trump, trump and trump. howard: right. i think desantis is second choice, 50% in the poll of voters who might move on from trump, but i don't think there were enough. that's how it looks. although journalists love at least creating the appearance of a horse race. after the break, what will happen to donald trump's january 6th trial after jack smith files a quirky appeal to the supreme court. ♪ ♪

did you know you can get 40% off a single pair of glasses at america's best? these savings won't last forever, unlike your eternal elation. ok, settle down. y'know, for someone who doesn't wear glasses, you sure are excited. for a limited time, get 40% off a single pair of glasses at america's best. shop online or book an exam at americasbest.com. you're at eleven. i'm going to need you to tone it down to at least a four.

another excuse, i mean, reason for my family to crave a little pizza time. well, i've got one. my cuisinart indoor pizza oven, ready to bake up some bubbly, cheesy, savory sauciness with that perfect artisan crispy crust in about five minutes. it's great for snack time, dinner time, game time. me time. anytime. it's always time for home baked pizza.

hi, i'm michael, i've lost 70 pounds on golo. i spent thousands on other diets

that didn't work. on golo, i spent a couple hundred bucks and got back down to my high school weight. you're not gonna believe this thing is possible but it is. there's something going around the gordon home. good thing gertrude found delsym. now what's going around is 12-hour cough relief. and the giggles. the family that takes delsym together, feels better together. howard: donald trump's campaign scoffed at jack smith, deranged jack smith as he calls the special come, for throwing a hail mary by appealing the former president's claims of um immunity to the supreme court. and in a move that surprised much of the media, the justices agreed within hours to take the case which could bypass months of delay. >> now they're fighting like hell because they want to try and get a guilty plea from the supreme court of the united states which i can't imagine because you have presidential

immunity. but strange things happen. >> the only sensible explanation is that smith filed this request because he wants trump tried, convicted and incidentsed before the 2024 election. >> -- sentenced. >> there's no certainty he will be held accountable before the election, no certainty this -- the courts will stop this wannabe tick today to have. howard: byron, was it a shrewd move to appeal directly to scotus? >> i think it was something he absolutely had to do if, as laura ingraham just said, he wanted to try and convict and imprison donald trump before the 2024 election. there's just no way to do it otherwise because the thing is we've said a million times how unprecedented this is. there's no law on this, so trump has the right to raise a constitutional argument saying i was the the president when i took these actions, and i am immune from this prosecution. that's never been decided. it's going to go to the supreme court anyway -- howard: yeah. >> is it going to take nine

months to get there or a couple months. howard: of course he has that right, but it's all about the timing. laura fink, the special counsel's goal may well be to get a commission, but isn't it equally true thatcom ed trump's goal is to -- donald trump's goal is to delay and slow things up and appeal until after the election when, if he wins, he could just order doj to drop the federal cases? >> i think they should add an addendum to the if you don't have the facts, argue the law. and if you don't have either, maybe you should kick the can down the road. that's sternly the legal strategy of -- certainly the strategy of donald trump. i think it's a thorny issue. i'm glad that the supreme court has decided to take it up. many legal experts who have more expertise than surely i do believe this is going to be a specious argument and that they will, in fact, allow these charges to proceed. and this is the first time, i think in a long time, that we've seep this particular court act

expeditiously and with speed. howard: yeah. is and i think that, look, there's the 66-3 conservative majority -- 6-3, three trump appointees. but in the past on these and related issue is -- issues, trump hasn't fared that well. the supreme court, byron, agreed to hear a separate case on the obstruction of an official proceeding law and what that means and how broad it is. could the justices wind up undermining the case against trump by limiting this law? >> this is a really big deal. it's called 1512c3 -- howard: you have done your research. >> it was passed in 2002 as a part of the sarbanes-oxley will. -- bill. it was in the wake of the enron scandal. but the justice department prosecutors have used it, i think they've stretched it, but they've used it to prosecute more than 300 of the january 6th defendants, and it's two of the four counts against trump in jack smith's indictment of him over 20220 and january 6th. it's a huge thing.

and in courts in washington, d.c., 15 out of 16 judges have ruled against those january 6th defendants when they say, hey, wait a minute, this law doesn't apply to me, it shouldn't apply to me. but one of them didn't. and the supreme court, on that basis, has taken up this case, and we're going to get a ruling. howard: laura, byron kind of previewed my next question which is not only is this going to affect one way or another the case against donald trump, but all of these prosecutions past and future of january 66th defendants. january 6th defendants. >> i think a lot about, you know, when it comes to conservativism, what happened to tough on crime? this, if we narrow this obstruction statute which in the reading of the text if you're a textualist which many of the conservative supreme court justices are, the plain reading of this text suggests that you can't destroy documents, but you can't -- or otherwise obstruct, influence or impede any official proceeding. and the question is if they throw this out, all of those hundreds of convictions of the january 6th ins rexists are

overturned, what happens next? what happens the next time somebody wants to go and storm the capitol and stop an official proceeding? if not prosecuting under this plain language law, how do we prosecute and prevent what we saw that shameful day in 2020? howard: well, those are good questions, and we'll eventually get the answer from the supreme court. let me switch now, byron, to the trump's last minute decision not to testify at that new york civil fraud trial. not that big a deal because he already had testified as prosecution witness, but the media spent lots of time talking about it anyway. >> well, i don't -- i think it was just a matter of self-preservationen on his part. it was, like, he's already been on the stand once. he was called by the state. so he's been questioned by his own lawyers, and the question was, is there any stuff that's so necessary for him to get back on the stand that he should expose himself to more questioning by the state? and the answer was, no.

howard: it just wouldn't be the defense lawyers questioning him -- >> but then the state gets a right to cross-examine him. howard: very good point. you apparently have done some legal study. trump did a social media post saying, well, he couldn't testify freely, that's why he didn't do it, because of the gag order in the case. but the only thing the gag order blocks him from doing is criticizing the court's staff. i take from that that the coverage of his decision not to testify, and i agree with byron on this, was important to him. >> i think it was important to him. i think you're both right. i also know that a donald trump sort of shakes and loses his superpower of persuasion and propaganda when he has to raise his hand and swear to tell the truth under oath. the legal implications of lying under oath are difficult for him. and the ability of prosecutors to pip him down -- pin him down when forced to tell the truth eliminates some of his main

weapons when he's out in front of the microphone in public. howard: we were talking last segment about the presidential campaign. you can just tell from this segment, and it's just a snapshot and we do this regularly, there are so many cases and appeals and legal questions about donald trump, and they all get covered because everybody loves to cover donald trump. i think there's probably less coverage than there would be for ron desantis and chris christie and nikki haley. because it's the trump show right now. great to see you both this sunday, laura fink, byron york. thanks for coming in and sharing with us. >> thank you. howard: still to come, elon musk reinstates alec jones on x, and a former new york times top ed editor says the paper is totally biased against conservatives. ♪

howard: elon musk has reinstated conspiracy theorist alex jones on twitter which is hard to fathom because jones caused so much pain for families at sandy hook elementary by calling that mass shooting a hoax. musk said last year that having lost a child, i have no mercy for anyone who would use the deaths of children for gain, politics or fame. but that was then. he justified it with a totally unscientific online poll and even worse hosted a twitter chat with him. former new york times editorial page editor james bennett who was fired three years ago for daring to write an online op-ed by republican senator tom cotton now says the paper is so biased that it's inclined to shut down debate altogether. he writes, the times was slow to break it to its readers that there was less to trump's ties to russia than they were hoping

and more to hunter biden's laptop, that trump might be right, that covid came from a chinese lab. he says a top ed editor urged me to start attaching trigger warnings to pieces by conservatives not realizing what it would say to the world about the times' own bias. bennett was forced out by publisher a.g. salzburger who now accuses him of a false narrative and says the times includes more conservative voices, but bennett toppled by a woke newsroom revolt speaks of the rising tide of intolerance among the reporters, the engineers, the business staff, even the subscribers with illiberal journalists determined to pursue social justice. and there's this about 2016, to the horror of the newsroom, trump won the presidency. many times staff members scared, angry assumed the times was supposed to help lead the resistance. scared and angry. that's powerful stuff. score one for prince harry in his legal battle with london's "daily mirror," a judge

awarding him $178,000 in damages after fine finding the tabloid had targeted his phone and that nearly half of the 33 articles in a 6-year span were the result of hacking or illegal information gathering. harry called it a great day for truth. not such a great day for piers morgan. editor of "the mirror" between 1995-2004 with the judge saying there was no doubt that he and other top executives knew of the hacking. pi e ers told reporters there is no evidence that he was involved and that the duke of sussex wouldn't know truth if it slapped him in his california-tanned face. the mere color or record -- mirror now says we apologize unreservedly. barbie was the blockbuster movie of 2023, and cnn is promoting it. >> if you missed it in theaters, good news, the wait is finally other. as of today, you can stream par.

howard: max is part of cnn's sister company, but the whole thing seemed like an infomercial. >> in her beautiful barbie pink this morning. [laughter] howard: well, a little too much pink for me. and that's it for this edition of "mediabuzz." i'm howard kurtz. i guess i've got to watch that barbie movie. you can subscribe to "media buzzmeter." we've had millions of downloads as i riff on the day's top five stories. apple itunes is a good place to do it. as you know, even though there are holidays coming up, we're back here next sunday, 11 eastern, with the only media analysis show on national television. ♪ ♪ feeling ughh from a backed up gut? miralax works naturally with the water in your body to help you go... ...free your gut. and your mood will follow.

for 8 grams of fiber, try new mirafiber gummies.

♪ ♪. eric: former president trump out ofon the campaign trail on