>> bill: got it. thank you. well done. >> dana: $2? >> bill: just $1. okay, i'll do two. >> dana: you said i won two things. >> bill: i'll be a gentleman about it. >> dana: i'll lose next week. you don't have to worry about it when the bengals continue to win. >> bill: they're done. court is over. we'll check with carey momentarily. >> dana: she was listening to president's trumps lowers and the d.o.j. argue about jurisdiction and immunity. the three-judge panel could rule within weeks and the supreme court might take it up. we are in the trial stew underway indeed. >> back into a different courtroom. we will check out of here right now. >> dana: podcast with kellyanne conway on what you need to know for the water cooler talk. it is good. only 20 minutes of your time. so much going on. harris faulkner will take you through the next hour. here she is.

>> harris: we begin with a fox news alert. a critical day for donald trump inside washington, d.c. courtroom. some of his rivals are on the ground in iowa. the former president is appealing for the all-important immunity in his federal election case. oral arguments just wrapping up in that moments ago. i'm harris faulkner and you are in "the faulkner focus." the former president arrived to the court earlier today. a three-judge panel heard arguments in connection with special counsel jack smith's election interference case. no ruling will be issued from the bench and the court gave no indication when their written opinion would be issued. trump did not testify today but he was there and the u.s. supreme court denied special counsel jack smith's request to leap track the appellate progress to get to the court

date in march. the issue could come back to the u.s. supreme court, though. the criminal trial before the district court is on hold until this whole thing is cleared up. i told you this is a critical day about immunity for a former president of the united states. ahead of today's proceedings, donald trump posted, of course i was entitled as president of the united states and commander-in-chief to immunity. i wasn't campaigning. the election was long over. i was looking for voter fraud and finding it, which is my obligation to do and otherwise running our country. that was his post. here is constitutional attorney jonathan turley. >> i think that everyone has gotten the message that time is of the essence. when the special counsel went to the supreme court, he said it's absolutely urgent that we try president trump on march or certainly before the election. the court clearly didn't share that sense of urgency.

the court will address it once it comes up. i also think that the d.c. circuit is likely to do a nascar pace on this to get it to the supreme court. >> harris: for the rest of this month, donald trump is faced with juggling a presidential campaign and a full bevy of legal engagements. senior national correspondent rich edson has more from the u.s. court of appeals in d.c. of course, his opponents across the political aisle love seeing this. >> good morning, harris. you've got the former president, his motorcade left. he did not hear from him today. we didn't hear from him inside or outside of the courtroom. it's not part of this today in the hour and 15 minute proper senesced. the former president didn't have to be here. he arrived 20 minutes before it began this morning. his attorney, john sauer, argued for nearly 45 minutes the presidents in their official act have total immunity from

criminal prosecution. if not they would face endless partisan prosecutions. the three judges hearing the issue, one a george h.w. bush pointy and the two others biden appointees expressed skepticism. >> it's paradoxical to say his constitutional duty that the laws be faithefully executed allows him to violate criminal laws. >> though judge henderson she also worried about opening the floodgates of prosecuting former presidents. special counsel jack smith east office argued there has never been a case from weather a president conspired with private individuals to stay in office after losing an election. james pierce argued for the special counsel's office saying that type of sweeping immunity would lead to a very frightening

future. >> what kind of world are we living in if as i understood my friend on the other side to say here a president orders his seal team assassinate a political rival and resigns, for example, before an impeachment? not a criminal act. >> now the judges could rule quickly on this one. it would likely lead to an appeal to the supreme court. trump's election interference case is scheduled march 4th but this has to be cleared up likely delaying the start date. >> harris: the thirst that jack smith expressed was march 4th. it's a critical point in the primary process as well. great reporting always. thank you. in "focus" now let's bring in leo terrell, fox news contributor and attorney. i watch and listen to your posts like a hawk because i know that you have some definite thoughts, first of all, on what the former

president is facing today and who is in that courtroom. >> i will tell you, harris, i listened to the entire oral argument. listening to the call of the questions by the appellate judges. let me be very clear. the impeachment and acquittal by the senate has to be a major factor. there is no fact pattern like this ever before. these are historic charges and historic appellate argument. so this d.c. circuit, which is going to be appealed regardless of the outcome to the full supreme court, has to deal with the impeachment and acquittal by the senate. that's a major issue. all these other hype that calls never before has a sitting former president faced charges regarding his duties as a sitting president but has gone through the impeachment process, harris. this is historic. this court is going to have to make a very tough decision. >> harris: former president trump is also facing more than one dozen ballot challenges

based on this case. republican senator deb fischer with this on the biden administration's being tongue tied on the topic. whenever political machines are interfering in elections american administrations have spoken out against those abuses. the biden administration is no exception. the authoritarian urge to ban an opposition candidate from standing for election has manifested at home. the biden administration has been largely silent. not tongue tied, just silent. >> absolutely. you think about the president biden talking about a fight for democracy. the most anti-democratic procedure to take trump off the ballot. harris, the supreme court is going to hear this on an expedited basis, february hearings. i can assure you as a civil rights attorney, i don't see any other course of action from the supreme court but to overrule

the colorado supreme court decision and that will send a rippling message to all these other states that are contemplating removing president trump off the ballot. i think the supreme court, the only issue in my opinion will it be a 9-0 vote or 8-one or 7-two vote. >> harris: that matters because if it goes anything along political aisle, if there is clearly not really, you know, a coming together here, that opens the door for the future and what could we see? >> harris, i want to make sure you and i have talked numerous times on legal cases. any issue involving trump and the court is not purely legal. you just said it. i agree with you 1 trillion percent. there is always a political point in every legal case trump is involved in. so you're right, if it's 7-two you have to think politics may be involved. to what extent? it should not be.

the one thing that makes our country so great is a rule of law but politics have unfortunately got involved in these cases involving president trump. >> harris: well, clearly there is a majority side here but it would be great if america could see a unified opinion on this. this is critical. a very important day for the president and nation. leo, thank you so much. i want to bring in somebody who was in the courtroom for those arguments. carey, our fox news legal editor. tell me what you heard today and what you saw. >> the bottom line question that both sides were vigorously arguing about is can a president be prosecuted for acts once he or she leaves office for acts conducted during that time. the president, the former president says no, he should be able to have absolute immunity is afforded to presidents for official acts while in office. the department of justice says

no. both sides were subject to pretty heavy questioning from the judges. the three-judge panel there. one judge asked the trump defense team what happens if a president asked a seal six team to assassinate a political enemy? would the president be immune from prosecution then? on the other hand one of the judges asked d.o.j. well, what happens if we do issue the opinion the way you want us to, that a president is not immune for conduct during the time that he or she was president? won't that open the floodgates for potential political prosecution and persecution? >> harris: are they thinking biden? >> the point being that if any court issues an opinion saying that a president can be prosecuted for acts committed and conducted while in office, a political enemy could use that opinion in the campaign.

so of course. >> harris: the only person we have facing anything as we watch congress dig deeper, republicans in the house would be the current president joe biden. that's why i ask. eight or nine members of his family under scrutiny, too. >> that's the point that trump's defense team made as well. the former president sat at counsel's table. stoic the entire time. he sat forward, leaned in, engaged. occasionally talked to counsel on his left. i have to till, i thought the three-judge panel was somewhat skeptical of the department of justice's arguments. you could tell they were concerned about precedent that they would set if they said a president is not immune from prosecution for acts conducted during office. they also obviously are wrestling with what does happen if a president say commits some kind of crime in office, what happens after that? i certainly walked away from

there not thinking that they had landed anywhere in particular but that they themselves are wrestling with it as well. >> harris: everybody's reputation is on the line here, everybody's, they know they have to get this right. whichever way it comes. >> that's right. >> harris: they're on the line, too. thank you very much. great reporting, carey. families in "focus." our special series on those closest to the republican 2024 presidential candidates. i spoke with dr. ramaswamy, wife of presidential candidate vivek. >> he has this energy and i went up to him and, you know, actually i have to tell you the truth, harris, that conversation did not go very well. >> harris: no? what are you serious? >> harris: i really loved doing all of these. as we are six days out from voters in iowa, i thought you know what? let's go back and take a second look and i'm so glad we are.

the full interview with mrs. ramaswamy next. ♪ i would like to take a moment to address my fellow veterans, because i know there are so many of you who have served your country honorably, whether it's two years, four years, or thirty-two years, like myself. one of the benefits that we as a country give you as a veteran is your eligibility for a va loan. not 80 percent but 100 percent the value of your home and that's what you can get at newday usa. (vo) it's ultimate endless shrimp with another limited-time flavor drop. new crispy salt & vinegar shrimp. it's all that... and a batch of shrimp. now one of seven endless choices. only at red lobster. welcome to fun dining.

i've struggled with generalized myasthenia gravis.

but the picture started changing when i started on vyvgart. ♪ vyvgart is for adults with generalized myasthenia gravis who are anti-achr antibody positive. ♪ in a clinical trial, vyvgart significantly improved most participants' ability to do daily activities when added to their current gmg treatment. most participants taking vyvgart also had less muscle weakness. and your vyvgart treatment schedule is designed just for you. in a clinical study, the most common side effects included urinary and respiratory tract infections, and headache. vyvgart may increase the risk of infection. tell your doctor if you have a history of infections or symptoms of an infection. vyvgart can cause allergic reactions. available as vyvgart for iv infusion and also as vyvgart hytrulo for subcutaneous injection. additional side effects for vyvgart hytrulo may include injection site reactions. talk to your neurologist about vyvgart. ♪ so many people are overweight now and asking themselves, "why can't i lose weight?"

for most, the reason is insulin resistance, and they don't even know they have it. conventional starvation diets don't address insulin resistance. that's why they don't work. now there's golo. golo helps with insulin resistance, getting rid of sugar cravings, helps control stress and emotional eating and losing weight. go to golo.com and see how golo can change your life. that's golo.com. ♪ here's why you should switch fo to duckduckgo on all your devie duckduckgo comes with a built-n engine like google, but it's pi and doesn't spy on your searchs

and duckduckgo lets you browse like chrome, but it blocks cooi and creepy ads that follow youa from google and other companie. and there's no catch. it's fre. we make money from ads, but they don't follow you aroud join the millions of people taking back their privacy by downloading duckduckgo on all your devices today.

latest accusation. i have received nothing -- absolutely nothing from the government of qatar or on behalf of the government of qatar to promote their image or their issues. the government's principle allegation of what i supposedly did for qatar was to support a senate resolution. this resolution was sponsored and introduced by senator graham and co-sponsored by 11 other bipartisan senators, posted on the senate foreign relations committee agenda and passed by

voice vote. now what was that resolution about? the resolution sponsored by senator graham and 12 of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle thanked the qatari government for assisting the united states military in evacuating american citizens and afghan refugees from taliban rule. how nefarious is that? then they reference some press release i made. well, the press release says in one sentence i am glad to see our friends and allies in qatar be moral exemplars by accepting afghans ultimately seeking safe haven in the united states after being forced to escape for their lives. that's the one thing it says about qatar. the rest of it is a call for international cooperation to help protect afghan civil society members, journalists and others at risk of taliban rule.

something i've heard many members of the senate at the time speak out for. qatar has played important roles in hosting our u.s. air force base, the largest in the middle east. in responding to the administration's call to supply natural gas to europe during the ukrainian conflict with russia, and yes, facilitating and receiving afghan refugees that the united states government was seeking to evacuate, among other initiatives and it played a role in brokering the release of israeli hostages held by hamas. now, like any other country, there are things that we disagree on. during the world cup preparations the question of labor violations took center stage. qatar's engagement with iran and with hamas have all been points of contention. i have criticized qatar as i have any other country when i felt they were falling short of their international obligations and applauded them when they led

in ways the united states and the world would commend. that give and take, that carrot and stick, that cajoling and rewarding is the essence of dipl diplomacy. we partake of that every day. the government uses baseless conjecture, that facts to substantiate the allegations. show a picture of watches but no proof of receiving such gifts. they talk about tickets to a state-sponsored event. members of the senate often attend state-sponsored events. i've seen members of the state department, administration and even the justice department attend state-sponsored events. the government fails to mention that the family member referenced to already had their own purchased tickets to the event. that's not a perk and certainly not a bribe. finally, on this point, the

suggestion that an introduction of a constituent to a qatari investment company is illegal is not only wrong as a matter of law, it is dangerous to the important work all of us as senators do. under the government's theory, it may be a crime for members of the senate to make introductions to companies and constituents in their own state to foster investments in their state, investments that create jobs and revenues and help grow the economy. indeed if that's a crime, advocating for boeing aircraft to be purchased by a foreign government and attracting a foreign chip manufacturer to your state and making technology investments and so many other actions that members of the congress take to attract investment and economic opportunity to their states would now be a crime. let me turn to the government's other outrageous accusation of conspiring to act as a foreign

agent for the government of egypt. this is an unprecedented accusation and it has never, ever been levied against a sitting member of congress, never. for good reason. it opens a dangerous door for the justice department to take the normal engagement of members of congress with a foreign government and to transform those engagements into a charge of being a foreign agent for that government. i want to address the accusations as they relate to me but i don't want you to lose sight of how dangerous this precedent will be to all of you. let me start by describing my history of taking adverse positions to the government of egypt. my defense of human rights, democracy and the rule of law in that country and my stinging criticism of a violations of human rights, democracy and rule of law issues in egypt. one fact is indisputable. throughout my time in congress i have remained steadfast on the

side of civil society and human rights defenders in egypt and everywhere else in the world. if you look at my actions related to egypt during the period described in the indictment, and throughout my career, my record is clear and consistent in holding egypt accountable for its unjust detention of american and egyptian citizens, human rights abuses, deepening relationship with russia and efforts to would have eroded the independence of the nation's judiciary, among other concerns. in 2017, i led the writing of a bipartisan letter to president trump expressing grave concern with the worsening situation for human rights and civil society in egypt. that same year i sent a letter to the senate appropriations subcommittee supporting u.s. assistance to egypt as long as egypt adhered to the camp david accords and urged the appropriations committee to include the requirements for

assistance reform strategies outlined in the egypt assistance reform act of 2013. in 2018, i urged secretary of state tilson to focus more on human rights issues in egypt and raise concerns the electoral environment ahead of egypt's elections at that time were not fair, free or credible. in 2019, i met the president along with members of the senate at the munich security conference and pressed him on the level of repression inside of egypt warning him that it risked eroding our security cooperation and raised concerns at that time about egypt's intention to purchase a russian missile system. in 2020, i spoke on the senate floor for international women's day an cited the cases of a human rights lawyer and an activity and reporter unjustly

detained in egypt fighting for human rights, democracy and a free press. does any of this sound like i was on the take with egypt? of course not. but that's not all. in 2021 during this very time period that this indictment alleges i was an agent of egypt, i placed a hold on 1.58 billion in foreign military funding to egypt and the tank fleet and 125 million in economic security funds. i placed that hold based on concerns i had with reference to the worsening human rights situation in egypt and the harassment and detention of activists in general, including the detention or harassment of family members in egypt of activists living in the united states. in fall of 2021 i took an official trip to egypt where i raised all of these issues directly with the president in the presence of our united

states ambassador to egypt, as well as staff of the senate foreign relations committee. the government references this trip in its indictment, but telling the fails to state what actually occurred and how i confronted the president which they know. the omission intentionally leaves a bad and unfair impression. most recently on a congressional delegation trip to egypt in august of 2023 led by senator graham, along with nine fellow senators and two house members, i once again challenged the president on these and other issues in the presence of my colleagues and u.s. embassy personnel. each and every time i raised issues of arbitrary arrests and detentions, violations of human rights, expanding of non-governmental organizations in a direct challenge to the egyptian president. again when egypt has acted in

concert with u.s. interests and values like fighting terrorism in the sinai, peaceful relations with israel, working to improve the rights of coptic christians to worship as they please i have commended egypt's actions. but you can't challenge the leader of an authoritarian state in public and among other members of congress and take actions adverse to their interests and at the same time serve as an agent of that same foreign government. over my 30 years of engaging in foreign policy, i don't know of any dictator or authoritarian leader who is willing to be publicly chastised or who regards someone who dares to do so as his agent. which brings me to the danger of what the justice department has created by charging a sitting member of congress with acting as a foreign agent. the relevant farah statute definition of agent is broad.

it includes anyone who engages in, quote, political activities, publicity services, or other certain acts at the order, request, or under the direction or control of a foreign principle. applied to members of congress it covers anything that could in any way influence any agency or official of the united states or any section of the public within the united states as to public policy. so when members of the senate from agricultural states went to communist cuba to sell rice, poultry, sugar or beef and told by the castro regime they would consider doing so but senators needed to convince the u.s. administration to change u.s. law and lift the embargo and commit credit to take place for such sales and then came back to the united states and advocated for exactly that request, did

that make them a foreign agent of cuba? i think not. when senators traveled to israel and hear from their elected leaders requesting greater economic and defense assistance or replenishment of iron dome did there add vow casey upon their return grebe -- >> harris: you take it to senate floor and try to defend yourself and point fingers at other people in the chamber. i'm curious to know how his day, bob menendez, with gold bars and cash were found in his home allegedly. even though there are pictures all over we've been showing on the screen. how things will go for him now. sometimes when you trow i to fill in the gaps, you can create more gaps which is why attorneys have probably told you not to do this. but anyway, whatever he was doing with qatar and egypt, he says i'm being persecuted, not prosecuted. i never took anything from anybody. steve hilton, fox news

contributor for fresh reaction to this. >> so my main reaction listening to him there was the utter shamelessness of it. unbelievable. he is so confident in putting out this shameless defense. this brazen kind of skirting around the facts and the evidence that you've been showing and making these arguments that are so thin when you examine them. so what will we say he said i couldn't possibly be an agent for egypt when i was saying mean things about the president in public. as if there is no history of people saying one thing in public and doing something else if private. that's a preposterous defense just because he called out the president on a few public occasions he wasn't operating behind the scenes. >> harris: does different things in public than they do in private. >> of course, you could say of course he would say that if he

really was an agent of a foreign government, of course then he would try to cover it up by saying mean things in public. the other point he was trying to make there, which is the advocating on behalf of a foreign regime is often part of the work of a senator. that's true. you have people right now advocating for israel. right. there is a big difference. they aren't getting gold bars in exchange for the advocacy. they are doing it because they think it's the right policy, not because they are being paid. >> harris: federal indictments. we had them on the screen. he couldn't see what we were showing on the screen but they are real and all that cash. anyway, we'll move on. he is still talking, by the way. we pulled away for all the reasons that you and i are saying. he is now just revisiting some of this. we'll check back in to see if he makes any more news with what he is saying. i'm not an attorney and certainly not his. if you are, are your eyes popping right now?

stunning new revelations about defense secretary lloyd austin's hospitalization. now the pentagon admits it actually did know about his health crisis last tuesday. but just didn't tell the white house. why? well, we're told this played a role. >> the best i can tell you is that the secretary's chief of staff was ill with the flu, which affected the notification timelines. we are going back now and looking at the process and procedures to include the white house and congressional notifications to insure we can improve those processes, bottom line is we know we can do better and we will do better. >> harris: republican lawmakers want accountability now demanding austin's resignation. other plans to file articles of impeachment later today. especially since secretary of defense, the military, was out of commission for days during a growing situation in the middle

east that's very dangerous for americans serving. our troops have come under attack nearly -- the number goes up every day -- 128 times at least, i should say, since october 17th. that's several more than just since a couple of days ago. opinion pieces with scathing headlines. lloyd austin hospitalized, biden is clueless. so much for adults being back in charge. lloyd austin's vanishing act is an indictment of the biden administration's uselessness and sneak enes. biden's staff does not respect him. senator tom cotton said this. >> it raises troubling questions. if this administration would conceal a mere elective minor surgery for a cabinet secretary, what might they be concealing about joe biden's health? >> harris: steve. >> that's a great point in relation to biden.

in relation to the austin situation, it is a complete shambles and gets worse every day. it is humiliating for america oh, they had the flu so they couldn't do what needed to be done. it reminds me of that terrible projection of weakness. when austin was on a trip during the covid era and walks off a plane. we have all masked up with a plastic visor. what does that tell you about the strength of america? so that's just embarrassing. it is worse than embarrassing. it is serious. what this whole episode reveals is that the people who are supposed to be in charge, the people at the top who are politically accountable are not really in charge. they're irrelevant to the process. the bureaucrat, it doesn't matter what the secretary is there, the deputy. the minute -- he was incapacitated. >> harris: it does matter. your chief of staff had the flu.

your second in command was on vacation in puerto rico and wasn't told that he had even had a procedure or anything until they had to put him back in the hospital. back in the hospital for some kind of painful complication from this what we've been told elective surgery. there are hipaa laws in the country. we don't need every detail what doctors were doing with him unless of course whatever they're doing with him now keeps him in the hospital for days and days and days. we might want more information. we are expecting right now, steve hilton, you are hear for the breaking news. we're awaiting remarks from the former president, donald trump. i want to thank steve for his time. we may bring him back depending on when those remarks come from the former president and what they are. he is responding to the arguments in his presidential immunity hearing that has been going on this very moment. so we'll await that. we'll break out of this next piece if we need to but we will try to show it to you. democracy 2024 families in

focus. you know i've been sitting down with spouse and close family members of the 2024 presidential candidates. candid interviews bringing you personal stories from those closest to the men and women looking to lead our nation. this campaign season i traveled to new hampshire to spend the day with dr. ramaswamy. she was campaigning with her husband, vivek. >> i want to celebrate my family, who is here with me today as well. we wanted to celebrate flag day with us. she will take questions for you, too. >> i grew up all over. i'm an immigrant. born in india. we moved when i was four and i like to say i have lived on every coast of the united states. i have lived on the west coast, florida, great lakes in michigan, and then on the east coast in new york and connecticut. >> harris: where were you in michigan >> troy and bloomfield hills. >> harris: tell me about growing up what your aspirations were?

>> when i was a kid growing up i was pretty nerdy. loved science. i always thought i would want to be a scientist work in a lab. and it was college when i had my first job there working in the waiting room of the hospital. that was my favorite job in all of college was just being there with people who were going through something very difficult. and meaningful in their lives and being able to help in some way. that's what really convinced me i should go into medicine. actually be one-on-one with people every day. in a lot of ways it is not that different from politics and campaigning. we're out here hearing from people about what they are going through in their lives and seeing how we can help them. i'm a surgeon. i treat swallowing disorders and yesterday i just did 11 surgeries. >> harris: the doctor is an oath

-- today she is with voters in new hampshire. >> can you tell us why your husband would make a great president of the united states? >> thank you, what's your name? is terry, thank you for that question, the terry. vivek and i recently had our eight-year anniversary and, you know, he has been saying some pretty ambitious things to me since we met. so right before we got married, he told me, you know, i think i want to start a company because pharmaceutical companies don't have our interests at heart. they make things too expensive. they take too long and they don't make the drugs that we need. and he said i will start this company. i said wow, vivek, that's a pretty big thing. are you sure that's what you want to do right now? he said yes. you know what? that company has now gotten five drugs approved. then while he was ceo of that

company, he told me like a month after we had our first baby he said, i don't like the role that politics is playing in how i do my job. i should get out of business. he said i will write a book about it. and i think it will be a "new york times" best seller. and i said back in 2020, no one knows what esg is, no one knows about stakeholder capitalism. i don't see it being a best seller. you know what? it was a best seller within a week. and now he told me a few months ago that we are facing a crisis for our country, for the country our two sons will inherit. and i think we have to be the ones to step up and lead our country because no one is going to unify us and remind us of why this country is the best nation in the world. this time i learned my lesson i

said hey, tell me how i can help. >> harris: it's a full day out here pastimes and politics and family. >> i do the bubbles. >> harris: they met at a party in graduate school. he was studying law and she was studying medicine. >> he has this energy. i went up to him and i have to tell you the truth, that conversation did not go very well because the first thing i said to him was i just met another vivek. >> harris: were you serious? >> she wasn't kidding. vivek walked away. >> we saw each other later and this time we realized that we had so much in common. we've been together ever since. before we were engaged i told my mom i had met someone and i'm pretty sure he will change the

world. i didn't know how it would be but i think now he has -- it just makes sense now that he is doing what he is doing in a lot of ways. >> harris: married eight years with two children, 3-year-old and a baby, who just turned one. >> this is our opportunity. this is our moment as a conservative movement to now level up. we've been pointing out the poison for a long time. we've been running from something. now is our moment to start running to something. we're running to what it actually means to be an american. >> we look to the president not just as the person who is sitting across from world leaders but really to be the role model in a lot of ways to our children, to our whole community. when i was a kid, we tried to -- it was bill clinton -- we tried

to look up to them and say this is a family of good people. we should look up to them. they have accomplished the american dream and they are here fighting for our values on the world stage. so it is important for them to care about the family. >> harris: what do you think now, you brought up clinton. let's talk about biden? >> well, look at his children, look at how they live their lives. with biden, it is hard because he doesn't represent anything. he is a nice old man who is kindly and a nice uncle. that's a lot of reason why people voted for him is because they wanted someone who just seemed like a good figurehead. so we have someone who looks like a nice uncle but he doesn't stand for anything. he does whatever other people tell him to do. we really need someone who has convictions of his own to really be in that role. >> harris: a wife, a mother, a

surgeon, she says this is the perfect time for america to get to know vivek ramaswamy and his family. >> nice to see you with him. >> harris: it's a perfect time to get to know some of the people who will be facing off next monday in iowa. that's what i'm doing. reracking that and bringing it to you and i hope you are continuing to enjoy it. a lot of people loved these. a lot of breaking news. this time we're anticipating that we'll hear directly from former president donald trump and we're waiting for him to come up to the cameras in this room. we're already to hear how it went in the immunity hearing. remember what leo terrell said earlier this hour. this is critical because this sets apart, this case, with kind of an umbrella ruling on whether or not the president is immune from a key indictment against him. and it could further push off

special counsel jack smith's dream date of a trial, march 4th, that happens just before super tuesday in march. we're covering all of it. when the president steps up. look at that. here he is. okay. the former president talking today about being in court. let's listen in even before he starts as they do the setup here. >> sitting president has decided to prosecute his major opponent who is leading in all the polls in the country. the issues that the court had to deal with today were momentous, whether or not a president of the united states could be prosecuted for carrying out his responsibilities, doing his job as president. we can't have a country where every four years there is a cycle of political recrimination where one administration attacks a prior administration when, in fact, that candidate is leading in the polls and will be the

next president of the united states. as our legal team, as our appellate team made clear it would be a disaster for our country. that would be a direct attack on democracy and that cannot happen. what was very significant today, i'm sure you all caught it, is the special counsel conceded that if it was president obama who was being prosecuted for a drone strike, then they would have to consider immunity. but when it is not, when it's president trump, then they are taking the position that there is no immunity for presidential acts that were required when a president is carrying out his job responsibilities. if we adopt what the special counsel wants, if we adopt what president biden wants, then we open the pandora's box to political prosecution after political prosecution after political prosecution. in fact, joe biden could be

prosecuted for trying to stop this man from becoming the next president of the united states. we don't need political prosecutions, we need political process. i would like to introduce president trump. >> i want to thank you all and we had a very momentous day in terms of what was learned and what they've conceded. they conceded two major points that they were right in doing it. i don't think they had much of a choice but they're very big points. i think we're doing very well. it is very unfair when an opponent, a political opponent is prosecuted by the doj, by biden's doj. so they're losing in every poll. they are losing in almost every demographic, numbers came out today that are really very mind-boggling if you happen to be joe biden and i think they feel this is the way they'll try

and win. it is not the way it goes. it will be bedlam in the country. it is a very bad thing. a very bad precedent as we said. the opening of a pandora's box and it is a very sad thing that has happened with this whole situation. when they talk about threat to democracy, that is your real threat to democracy. i feel that as a president, you have to have immunity, very simple. and if you don't, there is an example of this case were loss of immunity and i did nothing wrong, absolutely nothing wrong, i am working for the country, and i worked on -- very hard on voter fraud. we have to have free and strong elections. those two things almost above all. and we found tremendous voter fraud. we have a list of it and we have some findings if you want it but we have had tremendous voter fraud, determinative voter fraud. we worked on that and that's

what i was doing. they were talking about after. nothing has to do with after i left. it was during the time and that was what they were focused on today during the appeal. and they concede that and everybody concedes that and if it's during the time, you have absolute immunity. so we'll see how it all works out. we have a great argument. we have an argument where they conceded two major points. probably a question you have to ask the lawyers. todd, if you would like to talk about it. they conceded two points that i think were by normal standards if it weren't me that would be the end of this case. but sometimes they look at me differently than they look upon others and it is very bad for our country. you had a very big event yesterday, as you saw in georgia, where the district attorney is totally compromised

and the case has to be dropped. they went after i guess 18 or 20 people. they wanted to go after a lot of other people and go after senators. she was out of her mind. now it turns out that case is totally compromised. they say she is in far more criminal liability than any of the people she is looking at. so i think that when you look at what happened where they pay a lawyer with absolutely no experience $7 hundred thousand who happens to be her lover or boyfriend and then they go on trips and vacations together, very expensive vacations together, and the reason they paid him so much was because he was after me. because this way they can afford to pay him a lot more probably pass a certain test and that's a very sad thing that happened in georgia. i would imagine that case is going to be dropped. every legal analyst that i have spoken to, every legal analyst that i've read have said that case is so compromised now it has to be dropped.

very good people were badly hurt by that case. it is a shame. very good people. people that did nothing wrong. they did nothing different than what democrats have been doing for years and years and years, whether it's slates or anything else you are talking about. they were very hurt and it turns out that she profited tremendously in that case. it is illegal. what she did is illegal. we'll let the state handle that. what a sad situation it is. i want to thank everybody for the fairness we have been covering very fairly. most people agree that we're entitled as a president to immunity. if you didn't have immunity, as an example, joe biden was the prosecutor. we won't give you a billion dollars unless you get rid of the prosecutor that's after the company, his son or whatever it is they're after. he wanted that prosecutor gone and he is on tape saying it or you could say the horrible job he has done at the border where our country is being destroyed,

or the horrible situation that took place, the lowest moment i think in the history of our country was afghanistan, the way withdrew with shame, we surrendered, people killed, 13 great soldiers killed. many unbelievably horrifically hurt, wounded, hurt. hundreds of people died on both sides. hundreds of people died. he could be prosecuted for that. you can't have a president without immunity. you have to have as a president you have to be able to do your job. but if this didn't work out, if i wasn't given immunity other presidents that we talked about today. president obama with the drone strikes which were bad. there were terrible mistakes. you really can't put a price on that position. i think most people understand it and we feel very confident that eventually hopefully at

this level but eventually we win. a president has to have immunity and the other thing i did nothing wrong. we did nothing wrong. the investigation of the election, which was a rigged election, everybody knows it. they didn't use state legislatures, they went to the f.b.i. and you look at f.b.i. and twitter, the twitter files with the f.b.i. all the horrible things, fisa court, the signed documents, the lying to congress and the stuffing of the ballot boxes, all on tape. stuffing of ballot boxes all on tape. government tape. most of the information, as you know, we will give you some of the findings that just came out. all of that information, as you know, was gotten from mostly government sources, government tapes, government files, and government stats. so it's very sad when something like that happens.

you wouldn't have inflation but more importantly you wouldn't have had the ukraine situation, russia, you wouldn't have had the attack on israel, you would have a much different economy right now. you would have a great economy. and we would be respected all over the world the way we were just three years ago. so i want to thank everybody very much and we think we had a very good day today. the concession of the two major points was pretty amazing and honestly, i'm very great they did it. they did the right thing. thank you very much. >> you used the word bedlam. will you tell your supporters now no matter what, no violence? >> harris: it was very interesting to hear the president compare his situation in terms of immunity as commander-in-chief to that of barack obama when, you know, back in 2015 the headline in the "new york times" was drone strikes reveal uncomfortable truth. u.s. is often unsure about who will die. he called what happened on the

former president's watch mistakes. and he said that presidents must have immunity in order to do their jobs. he said if you would offer it to one president, wouldn't you in fact offer it to the next president? meaning it was offered to obama, wouldn't it be given also to donald trump? so those were direct words from the former president after a morning in court deciding immunity in the election interference case, the indictment there brought by special counsel jack smith. now all of this could then further get kicked up to the u.s. supreme court. we heard leo terrell say that. if this case slows down anymore, jack smith's date of march 4th for putting this president in court on trial might get pushed off, likely would. we'll be covering all of it. thank you for watching a breaking news-filled hour on "the faulkner focus." "outnumbered" after the break.

♪ unnecessary action hero! ♪

-missing punches? -unnecessary! -check reversals? -unnecessary! -time sheet corrections? -unnecessary! -unentered sick time? -unnecessary! -go! -unnecessary! -go! -unnecessary! -when you can take this phone, you'll be ready. -make the unnecessary, unnecessary. let your employees do their own payroll.