from our entrance of trump tower, not coming down from these golden escalators, as we described them, as we initially had thought. he will take the podium in a few minutes. there's -- it seems like a group of potentially trump employees, trump organization employees who are down here who are, we believe, here to support donald trump. one of the big questions i have, vaughn, is do any family members show up with donald trump today? eric was the only family member, the only one in the courtroom yesterday. don junior was there, ivanka wasn't there. we have never seen melania at this courthouse. does his family show up with him today? >> it's our understanding don junior is out of the country. eric trump was with him yesterday, including at a fund-raising dinner last night. ivanka has not been here. it lasted six weeks.

there was every opportunity to be here. melania not said a word. ivanka said, i love you, dad. this is a moment for a man who was on trial for six weeks inside a lower manhattan courthouse to not be seen with his family. eric trump the only one. this would be a moment if they were to appear with him you would think they would be here. >> inside the courthouse as the verdict was read, eric shook hit head. when donald trump got up -- he was mostly stone-faced throughout this, looking straight ahead. i felt he looked deflated. he had the signature grimace you see when he is trying to look tough and serious. there was an emptiness behind it, almost an effort to continue to present that face as he has presented it. he shook hands with eric and then he walked out. i do think it's really

interesting that knowing a verdict was coming down, that don junior was out of the country. it's interesting that ivanka never showed up to court. i know she's been trying to separate herself from her dad and said she wouldn't go back to the white house. i think it's notable melania wasn't here for any of the trial. i can understand why she might not want to be here, because it was about an affair that donald trump said he didn't have but many said he did with an adult film star while he was married to her. >> two things. eric and don junior have so much riding on the trump organization brand. ivanka and jared kushner moved back to florida. they have their own thing. for don junior and eric, not only was there this trial and their father's political fate, which don junior has been active politically over the course of the last eight years, but also the trump organization, it was three months ago that they were punished with a $355 million

fine, stemming from the repeated financial fraud that the new york attorney general's office found. this is a moment here. of course, they will go through the appeal process. when you look where we are, this trump tower building built 41 years ago. so much is riding not only on these trials but also on november. for them, they understand the stakes. >> there's a court-appointed monitor of the trump organization. donald trump is not in charge right now. we are looking -- you saw a moment ago on the screen next to us, you see where dasha burns is standing. across from her is matthew calamari. it was a trip walking back into this building. seeing all of the people that are still surrounding donald trump and have been throughout all of this.

>> not keith schiller. >> they told us they will start on time. it's 11:03. it could happen any moment. we are watching the area where -- that's roped off. i want to talk about the campaign going forward. do we think there's going to be any surprises here today? is donald trump going to give the -- >> you have seen some of the folks that were some of the hardest critics over the years of donald trump, ted cruz's name came up for having his wife and father maligned by the "national enquirer." >> they knew it was lies. we will help you with your campaign. we will put out negative stories. that's what happened. >> not only are they -- they are coming out in his defense. because they understand the ramifications of the next five months and how their political futures -- marco rubio, ted cruz, he is up for re-election.

he needs ted cruz maga supporters. donald trump's power continues to reign, despite 34 felony convictions. >> how does the campaign see the vice president position? who do they need? michael steele was elyse stefanik. >> she is. she's been a fierce loyal defender, not only during his impeachment proceedings but over the course of not only the aftermath of the e. jean carroll decision but throughout this trial. he is looking for somebody who is local. he regrets mike pence, because mike pence was disloyal. >> let me ask you this, what kind of person wants to be donald trump's vice president after what happened to mike pence? mike pence spent four years standing behind donald trump and nodding in agreement with everything. he was loyal up until the very end when he said he was more loyal to the constitution than he was to donald trump.

he left office to chants of hang him. donald trump didn't admonish anybody for it. what person wants to be donald trump's vice president this time around? what are they telling themselves about what they would be willing to do in that role at the end of donald trump's four years, if we get to that point? [ applause ] that's an open question. we will leave it. he is walking, i assume, in right now, because we hear cheering from not the reporters but from the trump organization employees who have been gathered here. we will listen in. >> this is a case where if they can do this to me, they can do this to anyone. these are bad people. these are in many cases i believe sick people. when you look at our country,

what's happening where millions and millions of people are flowing in from all parts of the world, not just south america, from africa, from asia, from the middle east, and they're coming in from jails and prisons. they are coming in from mental institutions and insane asylums. they are coming in from all over the world into our country. we have a president and a group of fascists that don't want to do anything about it, because they could right now today. he could stop it. but he is not. they're destroying our country. our country is in very bad shape. they are very much against me saying these things. they want to raise your taxes by four times. they want to stop you from having cars with their ridiculous mandates that make it impossible for you to get a car, afford a car. make it very possible for china to build all of our cars. it's a very serious problem that

we have. we went through one of many experiences where we had a conflicted judge, highly conflicted. there's never been a more conflicted judge. i'm under a gag order, which nobody has been -- no presidential candidate has been under a gag order before. i'm under a gag order. nasty gag order where i have had to pay thousands of dollars in penalties and fines and was threatened with jail. think of it. i'm the leading candidate, i'm leading biden by a lot and i'm leading the republicans to the point where that's over. i'm the leading person for president, and i'm under a gag order by a man that can't put two sentences together, given by a court. they are in total conjunction with the white house and the doj, just so you understand. this is all done by biden and his people. maybe his people more importantly. i don't know if biden knows too much about it, because i don't

know if he knows about anything. he is nevertheless the president. we have to use his name. this is done by washington. nobody has seen anything like it. we have a judge who is highly conflicted. you know what the confliction is. we will play that game longer. we won't talk about it. you are allowed to talk about it. i hope you do. there's never been anybody so conflicted as this. as far as the trial itself, it was very unfair. we weren't allowed to use our election expert under any circumstances. you saw what happened to some of the witnesses that were on our side. they were literally crucified by this man who looks like an angel, but he is really a devil. he looks nice and soft.

he seems like such a nice man. unless you saw him in action. you saw that with a certain witness that went through hell. when we wanted to do things, he wouldn't let us do those things. but when the government wanted something, they got everything. they got everything they wanted. it's a rigged -- it was a rigged trial. we wanted a venue change where we could have a fair trial. we didn't get it. we wanted a judge change. we wanted a judge that wasn't conflicted. obviously, he didn't do that. nobody has ever seen anything like it. we had a d.a. who was a failed d.a. crime is rampant in new york. that's what he is supposed to be looking at. crime is rampant in new york. in mcdonald's you had a man hitting them up with machetes.

who can imagine a machete in a store where they are eating? bragg is down watching a trial on what they call crimes. they are falsifying business records. that sounds so bad. to me it sounds very bad. it's only a misdemeanor. when they say, falsifying business -- that's a bad thing for me. i never had that before. i'm falsifying -- you know what falsifying business records is? in the first degree. they say falsifying business records. it means that legal expense -- i paid a lawyer, totally legal. i paid a lawyer a legal expense. a bookkeeper marked it down in the books. highly respected. she testified.

marked it down in the books as a legal expense. a legal expense, paid a lawyer is a legal expense in the books. she's -- it's a legal expense. think of that. this is what the falsification of business records were. what else are you going to call it? what else are you going to call it? i would have testified. i wanted to testify. the theory is, you never testify. as soon as you testify, anybody, if it were george washington, don't testify, because they will get you on something you said slightly wrong and they sue you for perjury. i didn't care about that. i wanted to. the judge allowed them to go into everything i was involved in. not this case. everything that i was ever involved in. which is a first. you could go into every single thing that i ever did. was he a bad boy here? was he a bad boy there? my lawyer said, what do you need

to go through? testify simply on this case. i would have loved to have testified. to this day, i would have liked to have testified. you would have said something out of whack like it was a beautiful sunny day and it was raining. i very much appreciate the big crowd of people outside. it's incredible what's happening. the level of support has been incredible. the whole thing is legal expense was marked down as legal expense. think of it. this is the crime that i committed that i'm supposed to go to jail for 187 years for. when you have violent crime all over this city at levels that nobody has seen before. you have businesses leaving. businesses are leaving because of this, because heads of businesses say, man, we don't want to get involved with that. i could go through the books of any business person in this city and i could find things that in

theory i guess let's indict him, let's destroy his life. but i'm out there and i don't mind being out there, because i'm doing something for this country and i'm doing something for our constitution. it's very important. far beyond me. this can't be allowed to happen to other presidents. it should never be allowed to happen in the future. this is far beyond me. this is bigger than trump. this is bigger than me. this is bigger than my presidency. the people understand it because i just see a poll just came out, the first one came out done last night right after the verdict where i'm up six points. six points from what we already were. we were leading fairly substantially. we're up six points in the poll. maybe other polls came out that says something differently. a lot of people have predicted it. because the public understands and they understand what's going on. this is a scam.

a rigged trial. it shouldn't have been in that venue. we shouldn't have had that judge. he should have allowed us to have an election expert. we had the best expert, most respected expert, head of the federal elections commission. he was all set to testify. he was waiting for two days. when it was his turn, bragg's people protested. the judge knocked him out, said you can't testify. he said, you can't testify for anything having to do with the trial. you can say what the federal elections is. that doesn't help. everybody knows that. you can't testify. essentially, he wasn't able to testify. other people weren't able to testify. with these people, they were able to use people -- nothing happened. there was no anything. nothing happened and they moe it.

it had to do with politics. notice the timing. the timing was perfect. this case was dead. it was dropped by every agency, every governmental board. it was dropped by the highly respected southern district. they said, no, there's no case here. it was dropped by federal election. that's what it's about. it's about a federal election, not a state election. you are not allowed to look at it. they took the state and the city and they went into a federal election. they are not allowed. the people from federal election southern district and washington dropped the case. everybody dropped the case. there was no case. when bragg came in, he said, this is the most ridiculous case i have seen. who would have a certain person -- again, gag order. who would have a person like this testify? he said, this is essentially one of the worst people i have seen ever to testify. he said, the craziest case i

have ever seen. this is bragg. then when they announced i was running for president, a long time later, they decided to revive this case. they got a judge, judge merchan, who was responsible for another case that was also brought. destroyed the life of a very good man. a very good man. who went to prison once. then they put him in prison again because they said he lied. he didn't lie. i looked at the statements he made. in fact, he didn't remember something and they put him in jail. they have destroyed him. with me for many years. he was an honorable person. he was an honest man. if you look at what he did supposedly, never happened. there's never been anything like this, over the education of his grandchildren.

he didn't report he had a car or two cars on his income. i don't know. i wonder how many people here have cars. i wonder how many people said, i have a car that's worth x. how do you figure? i guess you have to report it. i would say probably almost nobody does. nobody even thinks about it. they put this man -- they destroyed this man. they put him in jail again because they didn't want him to testify. they didn't want him to testify. that's why he went to jail. put him in jail twice. he is 77 years old. normally, i would say that's an old guy. but i don't feel 77. nobody ever says that about me. i would like them to say, we have to have a little sorrow for this man because they just don't say that about me. but maybe i'm better off that way. i'm probably better off that way. they put him in jail twice. you have to see what they put -- he was threatened by the judge.

this man was told, you are going to get 15 years in jail if you don't give up trump. he was told that. you will get 15 years in jail. he made a plea deal because he didn't want to spend the rest of his life -- he was told that viciously. we are living in a fascist state. he was told that viciously. you can go to jail for four months, five months, or you can get 15 years in jail. do a plea. almost who wouldn't do that plea? everyone does those pleas. it's a horrible thing. there's a group of lawyers that fight that. it's so unfair. it's so unfair. they destroyed his life. so many other things. look at southern district didn't want to bring the case. nobody wanted to bring the case. then you know who didn't want to

bring the case most of all? is bragg. bragg didn't want to bring it. then he brought it. they tried to make it a different case. they didn't say legal expensexp. if i wrote down -- this was a highly qualified lawyer. i'm not allowed to use his name because of the gag order. he is a sleaze. everybody knows that. took me a while to found out. he was effective. he did work. he wasn't a fixer. he was a lawyer. they like to use the word fixer. he was a lawyer. at the time, he was a fully accredited lawyer. he got into trouble not because of me. he got into trouble because he made outside deals and he had something to do with taxicabs and medallions and he borrowed money. that's why he went. then he pled to three election violations. as soon as i saw that, i said, i

wonder why he did that. he took a deal. he took a deal because he wanted to get off. in other words, i will take a plea deal and i want to get off. wasn't he wanted to make a deal with the southern district. they wrote the worst report on any human being other than the report that was written on james comey by the inspector general. a very great inspector general actually. wrote a report that was so bad. this one was possibly worse. the southern district, the judge didn't let us use it. he said, it's hearsay. it's not hearsay. won't let us use it. this is about the man. he got in trouble for a very simple reason. because he was involved with borrowing a lot of money and he did something with the banks. i don't know if it's defrauded. something happened. you know what it is. in addition to that, he gave up on three things he wasn't guilty.

the head of the fec, brad smith, the election expert, number one rated in the country, was going to testify. he took the plea on three things. he added them in because that gave him more bargaining power with respect to me. the three things with the election, and having to do with me, they weren't crimes. they weren't crimes. nor is paying money under an nda. we have an nda, non-disclosure agreement. it's a big deal. totally honorable. totally good. totally accepted. everybody has them. every company has non-disclosure agreements. the press called it slush fund and all sorts of other things. hush money. hush money. it's not hush money. it's called a non-disclosure agreement. most of the people in this room have a non-disclosure agreement with their company.

it's a disgrace. it's not hush money. it's a non-disclosure agreement, totally legal. totally common. everyone has it. what happened is he signed a non-disclosure agreement with this person -- i guess other people, but it's totally honest. you are allowed to make the payment. you don't have to make -- you could make it any way you want. it's a non-disclosure agreement. he signed that. there was nothing wrong with signing it. this should have been a non-case. everybody said it was a non-case, including bragg. bragg said, until i ran for office. then they saw the polls. i was leading the republicans. i was leading the democrats. i was leading everybody. all of a sudden, they brought it back. it's a very sad thing that's happening in our country. it's a thing that i'm honor -- in a way i'm honored.

it's not pleasant. it's very bad for family. it's very bad for friends and businesses. i'm honored to be involved in it, because somebody has to do it. i might as well keep going and be the one. i'm very honored to be involved, because we're fighting for our constitution. the money that was paid was paid legally. there was nothing illegal. in fact, the lawyer in creating the nda -- at that time, he was a fully accredited lawyer. he wasn't a fixer. i never thought of him as a fixer. the media called him a fixer or the prosecutors called him a fixer. he was a lawyer. he was fairly good. later on, i didn't like what he did. i didn't like, for instance, that when i became president, he went around and made deals with companies. when i heard that, he was gone. he was gone. he had payments coming to him

and a lot of this involved things that are very simple. these were standard -- this was standard stuff. all standard stuff. everything involved was standard. there was no crime here. i just watched a couple of the reports. you watch andy mccarthy, you welcome at all these people, all very talented people, great people, many more, many more. they don't know me essentially. they don't know me. they are legal scholars and experts. i look at them, i watched this morning saying, there's no crime. everybody says there's no crime here. except for this d.a. that's got this city out of control with crime. it's out of control -- it's absolutely out of control. we have an nda that was signed. we have legal expenses. here is the thing on legal expenses, you have 100 where

they say -- they do a charge. i recorded this out. falsification of business records in the first degree. it sounds so bad. i said, wow. even my own lawyers -- i get very upset with them. they don't say what it is. they say, well, falsification of legal records is only a felony. that's a lot. they say, a misdemeanor. they try and bring it up to a felony if there's two crimes. all these different things. they missed the statute of limitations by a lot. this was very old. they could have brought this seven years ago instead in the middle of the election. they missed the statute of limitations. let me give you the good news. the good news is, last night -- we just got a report this morning, in the history of

politics, i believe -- maybe i'm wrong. somebody will find i'm wrong maybe. but i don't think so. they raised with small money donors, meaning $21, $42, $53, $38, a record $39 million in about a ten-hour period. [ cheers and applause ] i like those people. because so far, i guess it's -- i don't know. i would rather not have it happen. i don't want to have it backfire. i want to win this legitimately, not because they were stupid and did things they shouldn't be doing. they shouldn't have brought this case. they were saying it this morning. this is a case that should not have been brought. i watched andy mccarthy say this is a case that should not have been brought. that was this morning.

>> we will keep an eye on this press conference, donald trump in his first real news conference, you could call it, following his guilty verdict, 34 counts, all guilty. so now he is continuing to say similar things we heard throughout the trial. it's important for us to fact check some of them at the moment. when he talks about the highly conflicted judge, important to note judge merchan was given the all clear, that he did not need to recuse himself. that's what the state ethics board found when he talks about the gag order, he is talking. he has not been restricted. joe biden or the biden administration, he was restricted from talking specifically about witnesses, members of the jury, staff members of the district attorney's office, staff members of the court. not the judge, which he

continues to talk about. not alvin bragg, the district attorney. he can still hammer on him. he talks about this all being done by the biden people, by washington. remember, this was a state case brought by new york state prosecutors. president biden, biden administration has no connection directly to these people. when he talks about how he would have liked to have testified, he had an opportunity to testify, to share his story and speak his truths to this jury who decided his verdict. those are just a handful of the claims that he made that i think were important to address. >> we are 25 minutes in or so from when he began speaking, and he continues to bring up all kinds of issues. i want to bring in -- we will be monitoring this. hopefully, there will be a question and answer part of

this. katy tur is there, vaughn hillyard is there and many others. i want to bring in katie fang and tim miller and catherine christian. and ashley parker. just off the top, talk about that gag order that ana was defining and the difference between what the former president says the gag order and what it actually is. he went directly to some of the people that were involved in this case. specifically, michael cohen. didn't say his name. where is that gag order -- >> he seems to be under the belief that he doesn't say the name of the witness, that's okay. that's not okay. everyone knows he was talking about michael cohen.

the fixer, the lawyer. the gag order says he has to refrain from making statements about witnesses, about their participation in the investigation or their testimony. that's what he is doing. in my -- i'm not the judge. in my opinion, he is violating the gag order, which is still in effect. the case is still open. he has been found guilty, but he hasn't been sentenced. the gag order -- he acknowledged he is under a gag order. he said it. let's see if the prosecution does anything. these statements publicly, you know, can enrage people who are fans of his. it puts people's life in danger. that's the purpose of the gag order. >> could this end up coming back to bite him at sentencing? >> the judge may -- the judge looks at what happens from verdict until sentencing. often it's the person is remorseful, look what he has done. that's what the defense would say. they will not in this case because it's not true.

the judge could. >> i wanted to add to ana's question, there's a presentence investigation report that donald trump has to sit to be prepared -- >> physically? >> sit with a person from probation and parole, the 45th president will sit with somebody from probation and parole. >> correct. >> they will sit there and they will evaluate him. they will go and interview him about his childhood, his education, his work, his criminality, the fact he doesn't abide by court orders, because they want to make a recommendation to the court as to what the sentencing will be. the idea that he violates these orders is a bad sign for him. it's not just the exposure from an existing gag order. what are you telling somebody about your lack of respect about the court and whether or not you are going to be a good, safe part of our community if you do something like this? >> when he says he could get

over 100 years of prison time to be sentenced tha -- that's not true. >> these are all concurrent. >> what is concurrent? >> all 34 counts, he could be given -- that means that's all he could get. >> it's not plus and adding up. this is not a case where he could get consecutive time. he can get zero time. he can get probation. he can get one and a third to four years. he is not getting 100 years on this case. >> tim miller, donald trump was all over the place at the start of the press conference and throughout, really. it seemed like stream of consciousness a little bit. he talked about people coming across the border. he talked about how they want to take away your car. that's a direct quote. what did you take away from those comments? >> by the way, i think -- we

can't say it's a press conference. it's been a -- >> a ramble. >> starting from a political perspective. this is a political speech. >> yeah. he talked about political issues, immigration, concerns about regulations. he is pretty incoherent. he is rambling. what is the point of this? it would be hard to summarize this speech. imagine another politician talking for five or six minutes about the friend of theirs and their financial crimes and how it was unfair. if joe biden did that, people would be like, he might be talking about the 25th amendment just because that's not what a politician does, rambles about cases. that presentation part is notable. i also think we should focus on one -- you fact checked a bunch of lies. the one about the doj and biden was colludes to do this. that's the foundational lie that's being advanced by everybody. i saw nancy mace, who is more

moderate, she was out there saying this is like putin and navalny. putin had navalny killed, put into jail in siberia. she's comparing trump's treatment to that. the republicans are pretending like this is some orchestrated thing by biden, which is a lie, totally false. it's not just trump that's doing that. >> ashley, this is really kind of nothing new for donald trump. this is the way he speaks. this is the way he puts thoughts into sentences as different and as -- i don't know. different as can be. >> before you respond, ashley, let me just correct myself. i don't want to misquote donald trump when i mentioned the car comment. he says, they want to stop you from having cars. i did want to fact check myself in that moment.

ashley, your reaction to what we are hearing? >> jose is right that this is how donald trump speaks. this is the sort of rambling and grievances and sort of d digression. like tim, i was surprised that this is a moment that broke through in the country. regardless of what you thought of the verdict, what you thought of the case, nearly every american is paying attention and is aware that he was convicted on 34 counts, the former president is now a convicted felon. i was sort of surprised he came out and didn't really seem particularly prepared and was kind of rambling. his campaign clearly was very prepared in the minutes after the verdict. they had a very clear message. i want to be clear, it's not necessarily an accurate message that he is a political prisoner.

but they had this clear message that he is a political prisoner and he was being persecuted on behalf of the country. if it could happen to him, it could happen to any of you. that's not what we heard when he came out today in this sort of rambling news conference that still seems to be going on. it's just surprising, because it reminds me of during covid when donald trump had all eyes of the nation on him because people -- americans were desperately tuning in to these briefings. instead of having a clear message about the science and about the health, he treated them as rating bonanzas. you are seeing him here, he is making some points. i don't know if these are the most important for him politically in a moment when all eyes are really on him. >> i want to bring in a former federal prosecutor. we have been listening to some of the remarks from donald trump following his guilty verdicts. i'm wondering what stands out to

you in what you are hearing. i assume some of these words could be used against him as his case continues through the sentencing phase. >> yeah. look, this was the usual whining and lying. he has been doing this for weeks. the only thing new was this business about how he is claiming people want to stop us from having cars or whatever. this trial seems to have taken a toll on him. he looks low energy, to borrow a phrase he used to use. he looks slumped over. he doesn't have the excuse of having been in court all day. it's 11:30 now. every day he was saying the same stuff. it was just as incoherent. he would ramble the same stuff. went out and just blah, blah, blah, every day. it wasn't persuasive now or then. it's full of lies. i will add one more, which is his claim that the election law expert was precluded at the last

minute from testifying. it's false. they knew for months that the judge was not going to allow him to testify on things they wanted him to testify about. what happened at the trial is trump's lawyers tried to do it again and the judge said, i told you this isn't going to happen. that's false in addition to the many other falsehoods. >> in fact, he could have testified. they didn't say he couldn't testify. there were just some limits to what he could testify about, limits that are standard when it comes to who can tell a jury what the law is. right? >> that is correct. it's not the place of any sort of witness or an expert witness to instruct jurors on the law, which is what his lawyers wanted to happen. trump misrepresents what would have happened if he took the stand. he said, if i had taken the stand, the judge was going to let the prosecutors raise every single bad thing i have done in my life.

that's false. the judge said he could be crossed and impeached on the legal judgments he has been on the receiving end of that involved him -- judges or juries concluding he lied, like the e. jean carroll defamation case. the civil business fraud case brought by the new york attorney general. that's a case in which the judge concluded he lied. it's standard for things like that to be available to prosecutors to use on cross examination. he was not mistreated at all. he only has himself to blame for doing the things that the prosecutors would have been allowed to raise if he took the stand. >> thank you very much. we saw there on our screen, donald trump just finished his statement, which was probably 30 plus minutes and then walked away. not one question. katy tur? >> yeah, no questions at all. we tried to throw some at him. he immediately walked away. i don't know if you could tell, i caught one family member, eric

and his wife. i didn't see ivanka, don junior, melania. >> boris epshteyn. >> todd blanche was here. they didn't characterize the case to his liking. todd blanche was smiling. there's a question about how long he lasts, whether donald trump keeps him on the legal team, whether he allows him to try the documents case in south florida. that was a very characteristic donald trump speech. it was all over the place. he opened by talking about migrants and immigrants. he was talking about how there are so many chinese people in line to get into this country and they are so young and they look like soldiers and they have the best tents and they have propane gas grills and the best

cellphones they can buy. it looks like they are trying to raise an army. pivoting to his general election talking points. the same talking points, versions of them he has had for nine years. they were obviously effective in 2016. not effective in 2020 after the aftermath and the pandemic. i'm struck, when he is talking about immigration, he does -- he tries to locallocalize it. he tries to appeal to veterans, people angry about veteran treatment. he is not offering solutions. instead, he is complaining about the current state of affairs and promising big change that he has no control over. when we talk about immigration specifically, there was an immigration bill in congress, led by republicans, a

conservative-tilting immigration bill written by mostly a republican, that republicans wanted, that democrats signed on to. the reason it never got anywhere, never even got -- it got to the floor for a vote but didn't go anywhere. it would never get to the floor in the house for a vote because donald trump told republican lawmakers to kill it. he didn't want a fix at the border which would have allowed president biden to shut down the border. he didn't want a fix at the border because he wanted to run on the issue. the border right now, you can try to blame president biden, but the border right now is as it is because there has been no immigration compromise, one that donald trump killed in the cradle in congress. >> absolutely. this is an issue -- you heard him talk about it repeatedly during this press conference that was initially going to be a response to the criminal convictions yesterday afternoon here. but he also talked about the idea of encampments on your

kid's fields. those that are listening to donald trump over the course of the last year, he continually is honing in on political issues he thinks are going to help him win in november, that are going to appeal to the masses in wisconsin, arizona, michigan. ultimately explaining away what took place in the courtroom. he finished by saying, november 5th is the most important day in this country. he named off his website. he talked about the fund-raising numbers. he is going to try to use not only this trial but his other criminal proceedings to his benefit. we are told todd blanche just walked out. they will go through the appeals process. july 11th is the day of his sentencing, four days before the republican national convention. at that point in time, that's when they will have the opportunity to appeal. it raises the stakes of november the much more and the issues he

is playing to. >> he is refusing to take questions from legitimate press outlets. he is only going to friendly media. a number of reporters here, who he knows very well, refusing to take any single question from any of us. he started off -- i'm sure you went over this. i want to underscore, he is talking about immigration, bad people coming in, sick people, insane people, people from prisons. this is a man who has been convicted of 34 felonies and saying people from prisons are coming into this country. he went through his litany of how it's unfair. he tried to link it to president biden. he tried to diminish him by saying he is not mentally there, it was biden's team. that's not true. there's no evidence to suggest that the d.a. was acting on orders from president biden's team. they are apart from the doj.

this is a state prosecution. i wonder, because he is refusing to accept the consequences of what he has been found guilty of doing, there's no -- he feels no remorse for it, does that affect the sentencing? i know you were having a conversation a moment ago with jeremy who said he doesn't think donald trump should go to prison because it would inflame the political moment more. given he has -- he is continuing to deny the crimes and continuing to deny it so forcefully, how might that weigh on judge merchan? how might this political moment also weigh on judge merchan? >> yesterday was unusual, because donald trump, with the 12 jurors who determined his fate, he infrequently has to face reality. he would take questions often and answer questions at press conferences.

>> he revelled in it. >> the only individuals he takes questions from are right wing outlets, which didn't exist, they weren't here eight years ago. now they are inside trump tower. his own echo chamber where he is validated, where his grievances are not pushed back or questioned. for him, this is an opportunity -- he knows he has the ability to control the microphone. he has a campaign operation that is precise about not allowing reporters like us anywhere close to access outside of a big environment shouting questions at the end. it's very difficult to put reality checks in front of him now outside of one or two interviews over the course of the year. >> siloing himself. one note for you back there. i followed donald trump for nine years. he looked different. he looked -- i said this yesterday as the verdict was being read. he looked deflated, tired. this is a moment where it's not a civil fine which, by the way,

it's a lot of money. this is a criminal conviction on 34 felony counts. it could put him behind bars. there was one point where he raised his hands and dropped them at his waist. i have never seen him do that. the scale of this, the magnitude, the consequences have affected him. obviously, he is going to push through and try to use it to his advantage. the burden of this is definitely there. he held this press conference at the literal scene of the crime. >> thank you both so much for that coverage inside trump tower around the trump remarks. outside trump tower, a lot is happening. i want to go to yasmin joining

us there. we are seeing flags, big crowds. what can you tell us about what you are hearing and seeing? >> i want to tell the control room to take our photographer's camera. they will get a better sense. they were broadcasting the entire speech while the former president was speaking inside trump tower just across the street. i would say that we are seeing the seeds of what the next five months is going to look like after the former president of the united states and the presumptive republican nominee was found guilty on 34 counts in the run-up to the november election. while we can say new york city is not necessarily a trump friendly city, there are a lot of supporters out here. there was chanting throughout his speech saying, go trump, trump 2024, as well. they are continuing to want to celebrate the former president

out here outside of trump tower. i was there for the arraignment of the former president back in april of 2023 in downtown manhattan. i was there for the arraignment of the former president down in florida for the mar-a-lago documents case, for the jack smith d.c. case as well, i was there for that arraignment. the protest presence was most significant certainly in florida. we have never seen a significant protest presence up here in new york city until yesterday each in that courtyard after the guilty verdict came down, 50 yards away from where we were standing. i would say this is as much of a protest -- a significant protest movement as we have seen so far outside of trump tower today where the president just spoke across the street in trump tower. i wonder if this is what we will be seeing over the next five months in the lead-up to november. >> thanks. there is so much to talk about

on this. i want to bring in defense attorney misy marris. the whole issue of trump saying that migrants are crossing the border with barbecue grills to be part of an army. this whole weirdness. >> nothing to do at all -- >> unless they are coming in to be an army of grill masters or something. these issues matter. how you talk about people and how you talk about a humanitarian crisis. anyway, i wanted to -- i'm still processing that. misty, let's talk about what trump said today at this speech, when he talked about his lawyer and his -- they call him the

fixer but he is not my fixer. there are gag orders in effect. what do you see there? >> first of all, the gag order says you can't talk about witnesses in the case. there were certainly potential violations to the extent he was talking about witnesses who testified. something i thought was really, really interesting is that he talked about his lawyers and not being happy with them. it's something we have spoken about throughout the trial, that actually it seemed like some of the argumentsaised by his defense team were likely at his behest. he wanted to say, i never had this affair, which was not relevant to the legal aspects of the case or even having robert costello testify, which ended up being disastrous for the defense. those seem like they were maybe driven by the client. i found it interesting he said, i don't like the way my lawyers were talking about this and the legal issues, which by the way -- >> his lawyer said yesterday after the verdict that donald trump was very involved in his defense. >> every decision was taken

together. >> judge grasso, thank you for being here. i will ask you, as we saw trump at this conference of sorts, he was not remorseful at all. he was combative about all of this. what does the judge do with that when it comes to sentencing? >> that's a big deal. that's a big deal. trump was really his own worst enemy as far as that. right now, the department of probation is working on a presentencing report that the judge must consider in terms of whether he is going to decide to impose jail. he could impose jail. it's up to one and a third to four years or no jail, probation, some combination. one of the main things a judge looks for is you want to see if there's remorse, some contrition, repentance. we saw the opposite. i think trump did tremendous harm to himself there. with the gag order, you know,

when i was in court every day, i was actually -- this is not a criticism of judge merchan because he had so many balls coming at him. i was sitting there listening -- i had my ear tuned if he was going to remind trump about the gag order to the extent now the trial phase is over and now we're going into a new phase, sentencing. one of the main purposes of that gag order as it pertains to witnesses, michael cohen in particular, is they would not be intimidated in a way that would impact their ability to testify and participate in the case. that part of the case is past. to the extent the judge wanted to hold donald trump accountable for gag order violations, i think it probably would have been good to remind him. i didn't hear that happen. but the business about basically going on and on about not

accepting any responsibility for anything, that's serious. the other thing that i want to point out quickly, which was mentioned by one of the correspondents you were talking about, the pretrial issue, this was very tight and limited. it was within the last two years on specific matters pertaining to the e. jean carroll, the trump organization case. i was listening as i was waiting to come on. trump was saying, they could go after my entire life. that's a lie. that's not true. just to say that for your record. >> we appreciate that fact check. that's important. you are wonderful. thank you foranalysis. joining us, eddie glaude, professor at princeton university and author and presidential historian, doris kearns goodwin. her latest boo is out now.

one of many books she has written. >> this is an unprecedented moment for both the american legal system and presidential politics. what's your reaction? >> i think the reaction yesterday in listening to it was one of the moments when the -- you realize the hallmark of our system is a trial by jury. it seemed the case was fair. the judge was fair. a jury decided. then that jury decided and the judge said judge him as a defendant, not as somebody above the law. to hear the president come out now, it was an historic moment. it's a crisis moment in his legacy. not to have prepared a speech. you think about any other president or former president at that moment would have stayed up with a group of people trying to put the best touch on it. maybe trying to take responsibility. feeling sad for what has

happened. spinning it as you want to. instead, it was the same thing he has been saying over and over, which is saying that the system is corrupt and that it's rigged. i wonder -- his people will believe that. they are out there saying that. a number of people -- all you need is a certain number now who will accept the story told in this judge and jury and will change their mind about whether they want a convicted felon or somebody with these qualities who can't accept a loss, can't take responsibility or our president, setting an example for the country. you need some of those interests and moderates to change their mind and the election will be different. he should have realized that. tried to reach out to them. he never expanded his base in anything he said, only exacerbated it. >> eddie, what do you think the history books will say about this moment in this country? >> it's a fundamental challenge to our democracy. it's a moment in which we had to make a decision of whether or

not we're going to be a democratic republican or whether or not we will give it up to a despot, an aspiring despot as it were. as i listened to the verdict and the commentcommentary and the f president today, i kept thinking about storms. i think about the tail of a hurricane. the calm of the eye but the tail is coming. what i heard in the rambling, in his body language was a desperate man. what i worry about is not so much the election but the environment. we need to buckle up. it's going to get worse. it's going to get stormier. >> doris, you wrote one of my favorite books ever, "team of rivals." you talk about how he was able to bring in people with completely different opinions, even a strong dislike of each

other. is that impossible in 2024? is that impossible going forward in our country? >> we have to hope that it's not impossible, because the most important thing for a leader is to have people that can question their assumptions and question them and argue with them. nobody has the example of understanding everything. lincoln understood when he took those people into his cabinet that each thought he should have been president instead of lincoln, each was more celebrated, more educated. people said, why are you doing this? he said, the country is in peril. these are the most able people in the country. i need them by my side. the interesting thing is we see how divided the country is. when an incident took place in the 1850s, when sumner was attacked by a southern congressman on the senate floor, it so shocked the nation, that it made moderates join the republican party. it showed how divided we were.

maybe now -- it seemed to me january 6 would have shocked the nation. maybe the idea that a jury said this will make us feel -- moderate republicans who are out there might decide they want the party to go in a different direction. >> eddie, i think about how fractured society is. it feels like it's getting more and more fractured all the time. what do you think is the real driver of that? >> i think our way of life is fundamentally shifted. the contradictions of the last 50 years are in full view. people aren't able to dream as they once dreamed. some folk are worried that the country is being given over to these black and brown people, that folk are losing their advantage, the browning of american is a source of crisis. i understand doris' hopefulness, her faith. but donald trump is a chaos agent that's taking advantage of grievance and hatred.