the, the, the, if they can do this to me, they can do this to anyone. and we have a president and a group of trashes. so don't want to do anything about it. donald trump claims his court conviction was personally constraints implying president finding in that haven't discussed by his re election, but we get reaction from the grounds. countries crazy. you know that at all worlds looking at it, saying, what's going on over there in america, the greatest country in the world? are we able to have a feller possibly? yeah. it's just a system. the other people in jail elections are over in south africa and with 99 percent of the vote, kansas, the african national congress stands to majority of parliament. the 1st time in 30

years plus is russia says it expects to tell a button to form legitimate government we have from the reading groups. political shipping has to pre says it's got us done is find the developing as they would cover us from the legacy of the day to innovation in just use a sick to we have a machine and how many so many investors. you compute that to the frontiers on the patient. all right, and now has more weight and more in fi, guess the discount 10 pm here in the russian capital, you're watching the international a very well and welcome to the nice our well donald trump claims his court

conviction this week in new york was a direct attend by president biden to 2 p to his run at the white house. trump was found guilty of full supplying business records in a so called hash money trial. he says the entire case was waked. if they can do this to me, they can do this to anyone and we have a president and a group of fascist. don't want to do anything about it. it's a rig. it was a rig 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, it was in conflicted. you're so 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's really a devil. that's how the american system of justice works as reckless is dangerous. it's irresponsible for anyone to say this is greg,

just because they don't like the verdict. well, we're here on 5th avenue in manhattan in front of trump tower, where there are hundreds, possibly thousands of people gather the bulk of whom are trump supporters, and they see this as a miscarriage of justice now. and the reaction to the trial from many people is to call this blake pollute us ization of the us legal system. many are pointing out, for example, that falsifying business records is generally a misdemeanor and not a felony. however, in this case, they made it a felony and donald trump was convicted on $34.00 accounts of it. here's some of the reaction to donald trump's conviction. indeed, great damage was done today to the public's facing the american legal system. if a former president can be criminal, convicted, or such a trivial matter motivated by politics rather than justice, then any one is at risk of a similar fate. today is a shameful day in american history. democrats cheat as they can visit the leads of

the opposing party on ridiculous charges predicated on the testimony of a this bod convicted felon. this was a political exercise, not the legal one. weaponized ation of our justice system has been the whole mike of a bite and administration. this was a shame show trial, the kangaroo, cool, who never stand on appeal. americans deserve better than a sitting us president. what the noise thing, our justice system against the political opponent will to win an election. now it's also important to know that the charges stem from an alleged payment of a $130000.00 to porn stars. don't worry daniels, it's alleged that parsimony there, calling it was paid to the former pornographic film star and exchange for her not saying things about the former president. now it's worth noting that uh that itself is not a crime. the crime would be what he was convicted of was falsifying business records

. many of noted that paula jones was paid over $850000.00 by bill clinton. in the aftermath of law suits for allegations of sexual misconduct. and bill clinton was never charged for that, and that was not considered a crime, but there are bigger legal questions about the case. for example, the jury was told they did not have to agree what crime donald trump had actually committed. uh, they did not have to be unanimous on what crime the president had committed, but as long as they agreed he was guilty of something, their verdict would be considered unanimous. and that raises a lot of questions about how the judge carried out the trial, and the instructions given to the jurors. donald trump has been found guilty on all $34.00 charges, and his hash won a trial. and here the judge is telling them they don't have to agree about what the other crime is under circumstances where that not only is what makes this a felony. people are also raising questions about why the judge did not pro, via the jurors with copies of their instructions. while they deliberated and

determined that donald trump was guilty, they were, instead told they could ask the judge to read the instructions again. but they were not given written copies of the instructions about what they were intended to do, and how they were contented to rule on the case. and that is something that legal scholars also have. questions about this is insanity. i've tried many jury trials in my day. you give jurors paper instructions every time. how are 12 jurors supposed to remember the elements necessary for each of the $34.00 felony counts? this isn't listed which one to prosecution. now at this point, people are wondering what this means for the upcoming us presidential election. donald trump is the presumed domini of the republican party. but the question is, will he be able to run a presidential campaign? his sentence thing is that for july 11th, this is certainly unprecedented in american politics. never has

a former president of the united states been convicted of a felony. well, we took to the streets of new york to gauge reaction to trump's conviction. and well, that might mean his attempts to get back behind the desk in the oval office, a means earnest, money, honest madison, honest media, honest selections, honest energy, honest education. now i don't know what they're thinking all over the world, but they're thinking we have a look for other countries. crazy. you know, that whole world is looking at us saying, what's going on over there in america, the greatest country in the world. and, you know, not too happy with it, you know, i mean, how dare them take a president and, and do this to my next president. i would hope people who are paying attention realize that a felony kind of votes and most states, felons gone vote. we're going to have a feller possibly have a felon. it sounds. is it just a system stuff with other people in jail on, on the,

on the door, the book on board with a fellow with in charge of the system. it makes no sense. the white house press briefing, the smile on joe biden's face may have given it all away in regards to the president's thoughts on his rivals conviction. mister president, can you tell us? or donald trump prefers himself as a political prisoner and blames you directly. what's your response to that, sir? well, for this that's cross now live to legal analyst and form a new jersey superior court judge. and you know, probably tell, know, thank you very much for joining us. how north the international you're on. i just want us don't. donald trump has made some pretty strong statement since that conviction this week. he has said that his case was a direct attempt by pressing fines. and to pull peter,

he's run at the white house. do you think that what's happened? we'll sink, trump sharp says, oh, are we likely to see the right rally behind him now, as well as the charlotte? good evening, and it's always a pleasure to be with you and my friends at r t. i think both will happen. i think that the conviction will result in a animating trump space and the conservative republicans who, who support him feel bruised and heard, and they will come out in droves to support him. on the other hand, there are many independents who i think were on the fence, who couldn't stomach the thought of the convicted felon. however odd and obscure the statute is we can get into that if you want. but the old, there are a lot of people, probably millions in america who are unimed silly and voters, and neither republicans nor democrats, who couldn't stomach the thought of a convicted felon in the white house. and we have to say 2 things. one is donald

trump and i have been friends for 37 or 38 years. he actually interviewed me for the supreme court of the united states twice. and he called me many times during his years uh, in the white house. he asking my opinion on a variety of things, so i know them personally and i know him well. but i also must say president pride and had nothing to do with this case. there was no evidence to support that allegation at all. you know, in america, we have a 50 states as well as the federal system in the state. prosecutorial apparatus is independent of the federal system, the decisions as to who the states prosecute and how they prosecute them, what they charge them with as nothing to do with the president or the federal government. but this prosecution was for a very bizarre crime that only exists in the state of new york. it doesn't exist

in any of the other 49 states. yeah, let's get into that because you know, the idea of falsifying business, reco, it's own its own is normally a misdemeanor renewal. something that can be essentially serv swept under the rug. but the prosecution in this case had argued that the case for trump was being elevated. to criminal felony as the misdemeanor was done to help commit another crime open, see another crime. looking at how this played out a quote, do you think? and if you do think, how do you think his defense team could have perhaps than a back to jewel? as well, i think uh, the defense team was reg was controlled by the former president who wouldn't let them do certain things and compelled them to do certain things. you know, when you have a celebrity in the court room, they are often more concerned about their image than they are about their,

the outcome of the case. so for example, everybody believes that donald trump had a one night sexual encounter with this woman story mcdaniels. but by denying that in front of the jury, that gave the government the opportunity to put her on the witness stand and explained all the laura details and paint the former president as, as a very bowel and, and reading individual. it also permitted the government to pay to play a very, very infamous tape of him, boasting about his sexual activities made many years before he was president. if the defense had done what it wanted to do and admitted the sexual liaison, the none of that testimony would, would have come in. the defense should also have challenged the constitutionality of the statute. that is, is this state statute, this new york state statute

a violation of the federal constitution? now here's how that would work, and this is what they will try to do on appeal. the federal constitution requires that when the government prosecute you in federal or in state court, you're entitled to know what you're charged with. and you're entitled to know the evidence against you. and you can only be convicted if the jury agrees unanimously on all the elements of all the charges. but in this case, the statute permits the jurors to disagree on what the underlying crime was. so it falsified their business records to do what to hide the fact that he was paying this woman a $130000.00. and it was a campaign expense which he failed to report. that's a felony which reduced the income of the trump organization,

thereby reducing its tax obligations that's a felony. but because the statute does not require the jurors to agree on what the underlying crime was, or even to tell the judge or the defendant, what the underlying crime was. it is probably defective under the american constitution. that's trump's best argument in my view. so when he woke up friday morning and his wife said, well, well, what were you convicted of yesterday? probably said, i don't know and he doesn't know and the judge doesn't know. and i don't know, and those are his follow doesn't watch it scrupulously for a living tone. no, because this unique, new york statute does not require the jury to tell the judge what the underlying crime was. it just requires that the 12 agree that there was some underlying crime. i just want to talk about the judge in this case. this is juan,

mitch and i'm, we understand that he has previously donated to the democrats in the past. do you think that for they was any potential conflict of interests that maybe could have precluded him from for signing over this a well, in new york state, the judges run for political office and they accept donations and they make donations in the federal system. and in new jersey where i was, we were appointed for life. so you're not, you're, you are divorced from the political process. so these donations by a judge, though they seem unusual, are perfectly lawful. in the case of judge, your merchant, the donation, i don't know what this is in russian money, but in american money to a very small amount of money donated $15.00. $15.00 to joe

biden. i mean, that wouldn't buy 2 hamburgers at mcdonalds today. so it's a, it's a miniscule amount of money. so i disagree with the criticism. said the judge, i still have given all the political pressure that was on him and all the horrible things my colleagues in the media and republican politicians were saying about them . i thought he did a very commendable job and i thought he was quite fair known to upgrade to misdemeanor to a felony charge. i understand that there is a need for not the most serious crime to be able to do that. however, during the fine routing the presiding judge didn't seem to demand any you, none of this agreement. what the odds aggravated claim was. and you said yourself, the donald trump, himself, and the judge himself doesn't exactly know what the crime was. um, right. so your assessment of that well, the, the reason the judge told them that they didn't have to agree on what the

underlying crime was, was it or no legal campaign contribution. uh, was it income tax evasion of bi reporting as a legitimate business expense. osh money plus money is legal, but it's not a, it's not an ordinary business expense. mean you've got to pay taxes on the statute tells him that the jurors need not say what the underlying crime is. so the faults here is not with a judge. the fault here is with the statute, with the legislation enacted by the legislature of the state of new york. and when was the statute and ask the a 125 years ago. that's how well the statute is. and very, very few people, fewer than 10 have been prosecuted under this statute in a 125 years. i mean, obviously america is very divided to long political lines. we have democrats clearly cheering base. so i think celebrities saying that 34 is the new favorite

number at the same time because the republicans slamming the verdict. we've had mike johnson saying this was on file and others cooling this, a weapon noise ation to the us justice system. do you think that that's a fast statement? and i think that if donald trump's name were donald jones, he would never have been prosecuted. do i think he was prosecuted because he was donald trump? yes i do. but again, in new york, just like the judge is run for office, the prosecutor is run for office and they make promises. and this prosecutor, when he was a candidate for office, said, i'm going to prosecute donald trump and the people voted for him. when he said that it's a defective system, but it is the system they've had in new york for a 125 years. very proficient ask you a question about this 30 full charges because my understanding is but they're not.

so the full crimes, per se, it is one crime, but donald trump was being charged for each document. the referred to the payment allegedly made to stormy daniels. do think that we're political persecution, rosalyn right? reaching is one case. right? that's a very good question. i think it was a politically written indictment because as you said, a lot of hollywood, the celebrities and democrats are now saying 34 is my favorite number. i mean charging somebody with 34 crimes, even though it's the same thing. 34 pieces of paper rather than with one crime sounds so much worse, so help. so yes, they could have written the indictment in a way that didn't sound as bad as it is. i agree with you on that, charlotte. now republican senators, as a result of this, have said that they're not gonna cooperate anymore with democrats on legislative

priorities or even norman nations. what kind of consequences do we think we will see in washington the full out of best case as well? i think the republicans are wrong. so to blame this on the, on the democrats in the federal government, as i said to you that said so. so we call them the federal government really had nothing to do with this. it's just a coincidence that the people prosecuting donald trump and the people in the white house belonged to the same party. but the white house can't tell a state home to prosecute and can even be involved with the prosecution. i think the republicans refusing to do their jobs are being petty. on the other hand, we have so many laws in america and taxes are so high. it's probably a good thing if congress shuts down for a while and doesn't write any more laws and doesn't uh, extract any more taxes from us. so, thank you. i just want to ask you, we, we,

we talked about the politicize ation of this case. but where do you think the line is with your, the legal hatch on between a justifiable legal case and a political persecution which donald trump has said, this is as well, that depends on the appellate courts. if i were in the appellate court, i would rule that the statute was unconstitutional by not informing the defendant of exactly what the underlying crime was, and not requiring the jurors to agree what the underlying crime was. somewhere along the appellate line, he's got 3 appeals to a state, a intermediate, appellate court to the highest state court in new york, every and then to the supreme court of the united states. somewhere in those 3 appeals. i think

a court will find that the statute is unconstitutional for the reasons i've just given you. that will mean no one else will be prosecuted against it. however, charlotte, miss appeals take years because you get online. there are already 3 years of appeals ahead of him on the 1st level of appeal. so this is not going to be resolved before he runs for president. if he wins, it probably won't even be resolved. during his presidency, it won't be resolved until after his presidency is over. if the wednesday only gets 4 years and can't run again, you'll be private citizen trump. before this is finally resolved, i think in his favor. obviously we're waiting for the sentencing to take place. the trump campaign is suggested he can spend over a 100 hayes and follow us, but we know that in new york there is a limit of 20 years when it comes to this type of felony. but there is a chance that he could get off with a fine. how likely is that?

i think it's very likely that he gets off with a fine and with some form of probation which, knowing him will drive him are crazy because they will have to report to the probation officer once a week. not while he's president, if he gets elected. but before he becomes president, but when you sent in, so i can tell you from all the sentences i impose, you have to check a lot of boxes. and the 1st few questions tell you whether or not the person is going to go to jail. question one. uh, does he have a prior conviction answer? no question to. is this a crime of violence answer? no. question 3 is the a danger to society? i know the democrats make years, but, but under the law is the, it's the answer to society. answer no question for how severely was the victim heart. there was no victim. so why answering those 1st 4

questions? no, that tells the judge there is a presumption of non incarceration, meaning a fine and probation was mean and not st pleasure of picking. you'll probably know all of those questions. thank you so much for joining us. how not to international that's legal analyst, full month, new jersey, superior court judge on june to pull it on to appreciate it. yep. uh, my pleasure, charlotte, all the best well, let's go to south africa now where the african national congress policy is on track to lose its majority in parliament. this is for the 1st time in 30 years, according to the preliminary results, the own well, with the 99 percent of the ballots come to the a n. c has secured around 40 percent of the vote and that is quite

a drop from 2019. when a was able to get 57 percent without a majority in parliament, ca and see will have to form a coalition. government not means it needs other policies to cost legislation is well, 9 west, thousands of people have hit the streets, intel to be even cold for the removal of the net and yahoo government and all of those in his government. the main thinking says wells prime minister has grown in the last few moments. this is his public opinion on israel strategy. in the conflicting garza has shifted particularly around the issue of hostages. people, as you can see that waiting things i slide these really slides and also some

spanish, some we've inscriptions that say and i'm preaching here b, b, b, and the mean of israel the number of vice face militants, enough guns done, has seen a dramatic decline since the taliban returned to power in the country that ca, assessment from the russian foreign ministry, which says the number of the terrible groups fight is as full in from 10000 down to 3000 president present research. he said most go had to build relations with the taliban since it's being back in control of afghanistan for 3 years nearly now. the thing is, the relationship with the taliban with this kind of stuff is constantly on everyone's lips and there are problems and i've got to stand and, and everyone knows about them because of how one should build relations with the current government is another issue. but we have to build them somehow because they are the people who control the country and control the territory of the country.

they are the power and i've got to spend today. we have to proceed from the realities and build relations accordingly. we are in contact with many partners, including those in central asia. russia is taking major steps towards the listing. that's how the bottom of that terrorist organization on formal recognition of the group as the official government of i've done this, done rushes forward. i'm just as ministries have advised, president nodded may put it to the taliban, which has been deemed the type of group by russia since 2003 can be removed from the list of fund organizations for him. and is this guy elaborate of says this reflects a growing reality and even the day of the real power, we've never removed all embassy from that know has the embassy of the people's republic of china, done the site find a way the best of the tele, but i mean, i'm past the of afghanistan presented his credentials inviting to changing things along with of ambassadors ross who is not the 1st to reassess it. so we're like since with the tell him on the central asian republic of context. on a close,

i have bosco, as excluded the top to bottom from its terrorism blacklist. meanwhile, china has come for regular dialogue with the group, which is what we ultimately of on don't use the international community should, through patient communication with the ask in authorities gradually enhance their understanding of and trust in the outside world and adopt more effective initiatives in response to international expectations, it is important to create favorable conditions for dialogue and engagement, and avoid pre suppositions and imposing programs on afghanistan, unable to you, and agrees. but with the caveat that the group has many improvements to make, but many countries said just 3 years ago, that with the top on what's happening to power enough gun this time, that now you can become a hub for global terrorism. terrorist organizations seek on govern spaces so that they can train and equip and thrive. and there is clearly a possibility that that can happen here. going forward. international community must to night to make sure that i've got these done is never again used as

a platform or safe haven for terrorist organizations. as i appeal to the security council and the international community as a whole, 2 spent together to work together and it together and use all things and things disposal to suppress the global category so that the enough guide is done. and to get into the that's basic human rights will be respected. navigating these don't have dentist done and must now become the center of terrorism, is that it has been, it is a challenge for peace, international stability against the common enemy of terrorism. and also supported in this regard. will also do everything to ensure that the restaurant the united states and europe can cooperate effectively because our interest of the same much of the media reinforce this idea falls forward to the present. and we see a very interesting and very different picture. despite the warnings when the telephone would turn to power in 2021 of the dentist, i'm fell from the top spot in the global tara index to 6 in 2023. i'm the group

often supporting the fight against terrorism. in the wake of the recent console attack in russia during the patient and nobody's done. prices had their physical opinions was about prisons and his stomach problems several times sung like uh, named uh, in the province in some, in the north of the countries. we have planned that there is no visible presence of uh, ices, but the idea of, uh, leadership has moved out of outlined some idea of when i organizing attics from being in atlanta. some they have not to the i have not uh existing in uh, as i know, but maybe as individuals know, some uh, intelligence agencies have into the infiltrated yeah. in the school and they are using them for the 4 digit code. and.