a former us president with six accomplices tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election — and is now, indicted. it's a monumental charge with grave consequences, both for donald trump and for us democracy. the accused is again the front runnerfor the republican republican nomination. his supporters say the indictment is election interference. the play book from 2020 is re—opened before the contest for 2024 has even begun. american debt was last night downgraded amid the political turmoil in washington. tonight our panel: jennifer carrol, republican and former lieutenant governor florida, miles taylor — author and former government official who served in the administrations of george w. bush and donald trump,

and kelly hyman, legal analyst and democratic strategist welcome to you all. there is a section in the special counsel's indictment in which jack smith breaks down this alleged scheme into five distinct parts. first, it begins with the false claims of election fraud. it is important to note that the doj says explicitly that donald trump it is important to note that the doj did know that he had lost the election and made knowingly false claims about it. second, the former president and his co—conspirators launched a seven—state strategy to pressure state and local officials to overturn the officially certified results. third, they weaponised, to coin a phrase, thejustice department to lend credence to these false claims of election fraud to try to pressure state officials. fourth, they pressured the vice president, mike pence, to do something they knew was unconstitutional and illegal. and finally, which brings us

to the violence of january 6th, they exploited that disruption and redoubled their efforts on the ellipse that to push the false claims of election fraud. a five—chapter assessment of the conspirachack smith will set out in court. but at the root of it, the very fact that donald trump knew his claims to be false, any reasonable man would know them to be false, and he pushed them anyway. good evening. today, an indictment was unsealed judging donald] trump with conspiring to defraud the united states, conspire sing to the united states, conspiring to disenfranchise voters and conspiring in attempting to obstruct an official proceeding. the indictment was issued by a grand jury of citizens here in the district of columbia, and it sets forth the crimes charged in detail. i encourage everyone to read it in full. the attack on our nation's capital

on january the 6th, 2021 was an unprecedented assault on the seat of american democracy. as described in the indictment, it was fuelled by lies. lies by the defendant targeted at obstructing a bedrock function of the us government, the nation's process of collecting, counting and certifying the results of the presidential election. the men and women of law enforcement who defended the us capital onjanuary the 6th our heroes. onjanuary the 6th are heroes. they are patriots, and they are the very best of us. they did notjust defend a building or the people sheltering in it. they put their lives on the line to defend who we are as a country and as a people. they defended the very institutions and principles that define the united states. since the attack on our capitol, the department ofjustice has

remained committed to ensuring accountability for those criminally responsible for what happened that day. this case is brought consistent with that commitment. and our investigation of other individuals continues. in this case, my office will seek a speedy trial that are evidence can be tested in court and judged by a jury of citizens. in the meantime, i must emphasise that the indictment is only an allegation and the defendant must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. i would like to thank the members of the federal bureau of investigation who are working on this investigation with my office, as well as the many career prosecutors and law enforcement agents from around the country who have worked on previous january the 6th investigations. these women and men are public servants of the very highest order, and it is a privilege

to work alongside them. thank you. jack smith, special counsel, speaking last night after the indictment. donald trump dismissed this third indictment as political persecution. kelly hyman, five chapters. how persuasive do you think this will be to a jury?— how persuasive do you think this will be to a jury? will be to a “ury? first we have to look at it will be to a jury? first we have to look at it from a _ will be to a jury? first we have to look at it from a standpoint - will be to a jury? first we have to i look at it from a standpoint that he was indicted. that means that the evidence presented to the grand jury

believe that he should be charged with a serious crime. these are serious crimes and it shows that people need to be held accountable for their actions and that no—one, no matter who you are in the us, is above the law. having said that, in the court of law, you are innocent until proven guilty, so he hasn't been convicted of the crimes. but based on the evidence presented to them, ultimately, it'll be up to the jury them, ultimately, it'll be up to the jury to make a determination whether they think that he should be convicted of these serious crimes of. , ~ , , , , of. its right, miles. this is very different to _ of. its right, miles. this is very different to the _ of. its right, miles. this is very different to the other _ of. its right, miles. this is very i different to the other indictments we've seen. the hush money payment case, the case of the classified documents. this relates specifically to his time in office. it goes to the very heart of how the us constitution works, the way the votes are cast, the way they're counted. it doesn't get more

fundamental than that. it counted. it doesn't get more fundamental than that. it doesn't aet more fundamental than that. it doesn't get more fundamental, _ fundamental than that. it doesn'tj get more fundamental, christian, fundamental than that. it doesn't - get more fundamental, christian, and in keeping _ get more fundamental, christian, and in keeping with that, compared to the other— in keeping with that, compared to the other indictments, this one is so much — the other indictments, this one is so much more robust in that you have people _ so much more robust in that you have peeple who _ so much more robust in that you have people who are witnesses to this from _ people who are witnesses to this from the — people who are witnesses to this from the highest levels of the federal— from the highest levels of the federal government all the way down to security— federal government all the way down to security officers who were trying to security officers who were trying to safeguard the united states capitoh — to safeguard the united states capitol. it really is incredibly comprehensive, and when you read it, you find _ comprehensive, and when you read it, you find out— comprehensive, and when you read it, you find out that donald trump very clearly _ you find out that donald trump very clearly knew his claims were false, his vice _ clearly knew his claims were false, his vice president of the united states— his vice president of the united states said it, his attorney—general said it. _ states said it, his attorney—general said it. his— states said it, his attorney—general said it, his lawyers said it. election— said it, his lawyers said it. election officials across the country _ election officials across the country he was talking to said it. it country he was talking to said it. it really — country he was talking to said it. it really is — country he was talking to said it. it really is pretty breathtaking to read this — it really is pretty breathtaking to read this in scope, and it is important _ read this in scope, and it is important that jack smith said defendants are innocent until proven guilty, _ defendants are innocent until proven guilty, but _ defendants are innocent until proven guilty, but it's really tough to read — guilty, but it's really tough to read this— guilty, but it's really tough to read this indictment. and not see how the _ read this indictment. and not see how the prosecutor would win this

case against donald trump. it's very compelling — case against donald trump. it's very compelling and it's an avalanche of evidence — compelling and it's an avalanche of evidence. , �* ., ., evidence. jennifer, i'm going to ick out evidence. jennifer, i'm going to pick out bits — evidence. jennifer, i'm going to pick out bits of _ evidence. jennifer, i'm going to pick out bits of indictment, - evidence. jennifer, i'm going to pick out bits of indictment, but| pick out bits of indictment, but this one specific part of it, page 14, this one specific part of it, page ia, section 28, which miles talked about. an official who we thought could be mark meadows goes down to georgia. this is december the 23rd. this is to look at the cobb county vote to see whether things have been don properly. he notifies that state officials were conducting themselves in an exemplary fashion and he tells the president that if there is any fraud in the vote, they will find it. and that very same day, donald trump tweets that the officials in cobb county are terrible people. that is very revealing, isn't it? all depends on perspective on where you come from. keep in mind the context because most people want to get into the mind of donald trump to say this is how he felt, this is what you knew, this is what he was thinking. whenjames kony came out

with the information by hillary clinton and he said she didn't intend to, he didn't speak to her of her intent. now we're getting into donald trump's mind whether he intended to say the things he did in a malicious way and knowing that information was false. we're not the jury, so i caution as we are outside looking in, it's easy to play monday morning quarterback. what donald trump went through for the four years he was in office constantly had a barrage of information being leaked out that things were that he was doing that he knew he was not doing, like the russia collusion. 60 years down the line, we find out that information was totally fabricated, so therefore if internally he's feeling the organisation is against him and he is another evidence —— six years. in his mind, we can't say if he knew or felt that this information was

false. ~ ,., ., , felt that this information was false. ~ ., , .,, false. well, donald trump has already been _ false. well, donald trump has already been charged - false. well, donald trump has already been charged in - false. well, donald trump has already been charged in two i false. well, donald trump has - already been charged in two other unrelated cases. he's do to take down my face trial in new york next month in payments to the former film star, stormy daniels. he unlawfully held onto military classified documents, but it is claimed. kelly hyman, i get the sense from the prosecutor that he wants to act with speed. do you get a sense that as soon as this is done tomorrow, he will take precedence? this case will take precedence? because people need to know the outcome of this case before they can vote. i outcome of this case before they can vote. ~ ., �* , outcome of this case before they can vote. ~ ., 3 ~ , outcome of this case before they can vote. ~ . �*, ~ , .,, vote. i think that's key. there was a recent study _ vote. i think that's key. there was a recent study poll— vote. i think that's key. there was a recent study poll that _ vote. i think that's key. there was a recent study poll that was - vote. i think that's key. there was a recent study poll that was done, and based on the poll result, no matter if you were republican, democrat, it independent, people agree that the trial should before the collection. i would guess most

likely trump lawyers would like that the trials to go after the election. i think that's going to be key and i think we will see how that plays out in court and donald trump's attorneys to continue the trial past the 202a election. attorneys to continue the trial past the 2024 election.— the 2024 election. miles, do you think the reason _ the 2024 election. miles, do you think the reason he's _ the 2024 election. miles, do you think the reason he's not - the 2024 election. miles, do you| think the reason he's not indicted the co—conspirators — there are six of them — says that he wants to focus public attention on donald trump himself. why do you think he's not indicted the other six? jack smith made — not indicted the other six? jack smith made clear _ not indicted the other six? jack smith made clear that this was ongoing — smith made clear that this was ongoing i_ smith made clear that this was ongoing. i think the reason for get this one _ ongoing. i think the reason for get this one out — ongoing. i think the reason for get this one out against one defendant is to do— this one out against one defendant is to do exactly what he said in press conference. it's to enable a speedy— press conference. it's to enable a speedy trial. we're trying to get this one — speedy trial. we're trying to get this one defendant in the courtroom

as test— this one defendant in the courtroom as fast as _ this one defendant in the courtroom as fast as possible. i would be very surprised _ as fast as possible. i would be very surprised if— as fast as possible. i would be very surprised if some of these other co—conspirators are not indicted. they— co—conspirators are not indicted. they clearly engaged in criminal behaviour— they clearly engaged in criminal behaviour so i would expect that to come _ behaviour so i would expect that to come in _ behaviour so i would expect that to come in the — behaviour so i would expect that to come in the not too distant future. at the _ come in the not too distant future. at the other— come in the not too distant future. at the other thing i want to push back— at the other thing i want to push back on. — at the other thing i want to push back on, not being in donald trump's head, _ back on, not being in donald trump's head. i_ back on, not being in donald trump's head. iwas— back on, not being in donald trump's head, i was on the inside in the stretches— head, i was on the inside in the stretches back several years. when i was in _ stretches back several years. when i was in the _ stretches back several years. when i was in the trump administration, and meetings _ was in the trump administration, and meetings with the president and air force _ meetings with the president and air force one. — meetings with the president and air force one, he talked about how he wanted _ force one, he talked about how he wanted to — force one, he talked about how he wanted to use the insurrection act to enable — wanted to use the insurrection act to enable him to have more power. and we _ to enable him to have more power. and we see — to enable him to have more power. and we see top advisers before january— and we see top advisers before january the 6th, musings about the act. january the 6th, musings about the act this _ january the 6th, musings about the act. this was not something spur of the moment. he spent many years laying — the moment. he spent many years laying the _ the moment. he spent many years laying the groundwork for this, i asked _ laying the groundwork for this, i asked aids about it, and i can testify— asked aids about it, and i can testify to _ asked aids about it, and i can testify to that in person and first—hand —— asked aides. that testify to that in person and first-hand -- asked aides. that is the oint first-hand -- asked aides. that is the point that _ first-hand -- asked aides. that is the point that jack _ first-hand -- asked aides. that is the point that jack smith - first-hand -- asked aides. that is the point that jack smith comes l first-hand -- asked aides. that is| the point that jack smith comes to on page two of the indictment,

jennifer, that he knows there will be first amendment defence to this. the president was expressing his right, to speak freely, even to lie about the election. but that doesn't entitle him to conspire with others to defraud the country of its election, to deny the votes that were cast. do you think a first amendment defence is going to stand up amendment defence is going to stand up under that sort of scrutiny? well, that's why it goes that route for the _ well, that's why it goes that route for the jury— well, that's why it goes that route for the jury to _ well, that's why it goes that route for the jury to hear— well, that's why it goes that route for the jury to hear evidence - for the jury to hear evidence on lpoth— for the jury to hear evidence on both sides _ for the jury to hear evidence on both sides. because _ for the jury to hear evidence on both sides. because hearsay. for the jury to hear evidence on both sides. because hearsay is| for the jury to hear evidence on - both sides. because hearsay is one thing. _ both sides. because hearsay is one thing. but — both sides. because hearsay is one thing. but when— both sides. because hearsay is one thing, but when evidence - both sides. because hearsay is one thing, but when evidence is- thing, but when evidence is presented. _ thing, but when evidence is presented, it's _ thing, but when evidence is presented, it's another. - thing, but when evidence is| presented, it's another. 0ne thing, but when evidence is- presented, it's another. one of the things— presented, it's another. one of the things in— presented, it's another. one of the things in our— presented, it's another. one of the things in our constitution _ presented, it's another. one of the things in our constitution that - things in our constitution that gives— things in our constitution that gives us— things in our constitution that gives us the _ things in our constitution that gives us the ultimate - things in our constitution that gives us the ultimate right - things in our constitution that gives us the ultimate right is| things in our constitution that i gives us the ultimate right is our first amendment. _ gives us the ultimate right is our first amendment. and _ gives us the ultimate right is our first amendment. and that's - gives us the ultimate right is our| first amendment. and that's free speech— first amendment. and that's free speech whether— first amendment. and that's free speech whether we _ first amendment. and that's free speech whether we like - first amendment. and that's free speech whether we like what - first amendment. and that's free speech whether we like what we i first amendment. and that's free - speech whether we like what we hear or not _ speech whether we like what we hear or not now. — speech whether we like what we hear or not now. the— speech whether we like what we hear or not. now, the other— speech whether we like what we hear or not. now, the other part— speech whether we like what we hear or not. now, the other part of- speech whether we like what we hear or not. now, the other part of free i or not. now, the other part of free speech— or not. now, the other part of free speech is— or not. now, the other part of free speech is that _ or not. now, the other part of free speech is that you _ or not. now, the other part of free speech is that you cannot - or not. now, the other part of free speech is that you cannot use - or not. now, the other part of free speech is that you cannot use free | speech is that you cannot use free speech— speech is that you cannot use free speech to — speech is that you cannot use free speech to make _ speech is that you cannot use free speech to make people _ speech is that you cannot use free speech to make people do - speech to make people do something or encourage — speech to make people do something or encourage them _ speech to make people do something or encourage them to _ speech to make people do something or encourage them to do _ speech to make people do something or encourage them to do something i or encourage them to do something that's— or encourage them to do something that's going — or encourage them to do something that's going to — or encourage them to do something that's going to either— or encourage them to do something that's going to either be _ or encourage them to do something that's going to either be their- that's going to either be their safety— that's going to either be their safety and _ that's going to either be their safety and security—

that's going to either be their safety and security or - that's going to either be their safety and security or other's| safety and security or other's safety~ — safety and security or other's safety~ one _ safety and security or other's safety. one thing _ safety and security or other's safety. one thing that - safety and security or other's| safety. one thing that appears safety and security or other's - safety. one thing that appears in the indictment _ safety. one thing that appears in the indictment is _ safety. one thing that appears in the indictment is that _ safety. 0ne thing that appears in the indictment is that jack- safety. one thing that appears in the indictment is that jack smith| the indictment is that jack smith doesn't — the indictment is that jack smith doesn't claim _ the indictment is that jack smith doesn't claim what _ the indictment is that jack smith doesn't claim what he's - the indictment is that jack smith doesn't claim what he's —— - doesn't claim what he's —— donald trump _ doesn't claim what he's —— donald trump stated _ doesn't claim what he's —— donald trump stated to _ doesn't claim what he's —— donald trump stated to go _ doesn't claim what he's —— donald trump stated to go peacefully. . doesn't claim what he's —— donald i trump stated to go peacefully. why was that _ trump stated to go peacefully. why was that information _ trump stated to go peacefully. why was that information excluded - trump stated to go peacefully. why was that information excluded fromj was that information excluded from his presentation— was that information excluded from his presentation that _ was that information excluded from his presentation that he _ was that information excluded from his presentation that he gave - was that information excluded from his presentation that he gave for. his presentation that he gave for the charges? _ his presentation that he gave for the charges? if— his presentation that he gave for the charges? if you're _ his presentation that he gave for the charges? if you're going - his presentation that he gave for the charges? if you're going to l his presentation that he gave for. the charges? if you're going to ring charges _ the charges? if you're going to ring charges against _ the charges? if you're going to ring charges against someone, - the charges? if you're going to ring charges against someone, you - the charges? if you're going to ringi charges against someone, you need the charges? if you're going to ring - charges against someone, you need to -et charges against someone, you need to get the _ charges against someone, you need to get the positive — charges against someone, you need to get the positive in— charges against someone, you need to get the positive in the _ charges against someone, you need to get the positive in the minus— charges against someone, you need to get the positive in the minus as - get the positive in the minus as well as— get the positive in the minus as well as what— get the positive in the minus as well as what may _ get the positive in the minus as well as what may be _ get the positive in the minus asi well as what may be exculpatory get the positive in the minus as - well as what may be exculpatory as evidence _ well as what may be exculpatory as evidence of— well as what may be exculpatory as evidence of the _ well as what may be exculpatory as evidence of the defendant - well as what may be exculpatory as evidence of the defendant can - well as what may be exculpatory as . evidence of the defendant can defend themselves — evidence of the defendant can defend themselves i— evidence of the defendant can defend themselves. i understand _ evidence of the defendant can defend themselves. i understand people - evidence of the defendant can defendl themselves. i understand people have strong _ themselves. i understand people have strong feelings — themselves. i understand people have strong feelings about _ themselves. i understand people have strong feelings about donald - themselves. i understand people have strong feelings about donald trump . strong feelings about donald trump and would _ strong feelings about donald trump and would love _ strong feelings about donald trump and would love to _ strong feelings about donald trump and would love to see _ strong feelings about donald trump and would love to see him - and would love to see him incarcerated, _ and would love to see him incarcerated, but - and would love to see him incarcerated, but i'm - and would love to see him incarcerated, but i'm a - and would love to see him - incarcerated, but i'm a person that believes— incarcerated, but i'm a person that believes in— incarcerated, but i'm a person that believes in our— incarcerated, but i'm a person that believes in our constitution, - incarcerated, but i'm a person that believes in our constitution, i- believes in our constitution, i believe — believes in our constitution, i believe in _ believes in our constitution, i believe in our— believes in our constitution, i believe in ourjudicial- believes in our constitution, i believe in ourjudicial system| believes in our constitution, i- believe in ourjudicial system and everyone — believe in ourjudicial system and everyone has— believe in ourjudicial system and everyone has an _ believe in ourjudicial system and everyone has an opportunity - believe in ourjudicial system and everyone has an opportunity to l believe in ourjudicial system and i everyone has an opportunity to have their day— everyone has an opportunity to have their day in— everyone has an opportunity to have their day in court— everyone has an opportunity to have their day in court and _ everyone has an opportunity to have their day in court and present - their day in court and present evidence _ their day in court and present evidence so— their day in court and present evidence so that _ their day in court and present evidence so that the - their day in court and present evidence so that the jury- their day in court and present - evidence so that the jury couldn't make _ evidence so that the jury couldn't make a _ evidence so that the jury couldn't make a decision _ evidence so that the jury couldn't make a decision based _ evidence so that the jury couldn't make a decision based on - evidence so that the jury couldn't make a decision based on facts. i evidence so that the jury couldn't i make a decision based on facts. so, this is not like _ make a decision based on facts. this is not like nazi germany or an autocratic state, russia, or others around the world? this is the legal process unfolding as it should?

correct. , . process unfolding as it should? correct. , , ., ., correct. 0k. kelly, i 'ust want to, before correct. ok. kelly, i 'ust want to, before we— correct. 0k. kelly, i 'ust want to, before we got correct. 0k. kelly, i 'ust want to, before we go to _ correct. 0k. kelly, i 'ust want to, before we go to a _ correct. 0k. kelly, ijust want to, before we go to a short _ correct. 0k. kelly, ijust want to, before we go to a short break, i i before we go to a short break, i just want to talk about what we did learn last night, which we didn't hearfrom the january learn last night, which we didn't hear from the january the 6th committee, largely because he didn't give any evidence. that is that the vice president mike pence had kept a contemporaneous notes or notes while all this was unfolding. how important is this in court? can it be brought into a case and how do juries view that?— be brought into a case and how do juries view that? well, absolutely, and it'll be interesting _ juries view that? well, absolutely, and it'll be interesting to _ juries view that? well, absolutely, and it'll be interesting to see - juries view that? well, absolutely, and it'll be interesting to see if - and it'll be interesting to see if in fact he's called to testify at the trial. i'm guessing that former vice president pence will be called to testify because his notes were in some ways a road map that helped this indictment. i think that's going to be very key for the jury to hear this from the notes itself, but

also from him personally as well. around the world and across the uk, this is bbc news. fitch cut its credit rating for the us government one notch from aaa, the highest possible rating, to aa+, citing america's "erosion of governance" and rising deficits. here's michelle fleury. for americans who have credit reports to determine if they can borrow money and how much debt they can take on, the us government has its own credit report. and itjust got downgraded for the first time since 2011. fitch lowered its rating from aaa to aa plus. now, back in may, fitch, one of the three major ratings agencies, put the us government on notice, blaming the standoff over the debt ceiling. the debt ceiling was ultimately lifted in a last—minute bipartisan deal averting america's first ever default, but the feud was cited by fitch

as one of the reasons for the downgrade. and make no mistake, this is a major black eye for america. us treasuries, essentially government ious, are seen as the bedrock of the global financial system. fitch is essentially pointing out that there is an erosion of trust in american leadership. you're live with bbc news. what evidence do we have that donald trump knew he had lost the 2020 election? the former president pushed these talking points towards congressional republicans for them to refer to in interviews they give. among these, he says, was acting under a constitutional obligation to secure the integrity of the vote. he also says he acted throughout this process on the advice of legal councel. on the advice of legal counsel and was exercising his first amendments rights, the right to free speech. but let's remind ourselves of the evidence presented by the january 6th committee, and the testimony we got from some of his senior advisers. please note the following clip

contains some colourful language. i remember maybe a week after the election was called, i popped into the ovaljust to, like, give the president the headlines and see how he was doing. and he was looking at the tv and he said, do you believe i lost this effing election? i made it clear that i did not agree with the idea was stolen and putting out this stuff. — which i told the president was bullshit. you also noted that mr rosen said to mr trump... - how did the president respond to that, sir? i he responded very quickly and said essentially, "that's not what i'm asking you to do. "what i'm just asking you to do is just say it was corrupt and leave the rest to me

and the republican congress." jennifer, i want to pick up on the point that thejoint jennifer, i want to pick up on the point that the joint chiefs made, because you have a military background. mark millie was in the white house throughout all this and there was a meeting onjanuary the 3rd, this meeting where thejoint chiefs, the nsa were talking about a security issue. they say quite clearly to the president, this is too late for you. we're very close too late for you. we're very close to the certification of the vote, and he said, "you're right." he acknowledges in that statement that he lost. he admits it to general millie. how important do you think that evidence might be? it millie. how important do you think that evidence might be?— that evidence might be? it could be im-ortant, that evidence might be? it could be important. but _ that evidence might be? it could be important, but the _ that evidence might be? it could be important, but the other— that evidence might be? it could be important, but the other things - important, but the other things is who got— important, but the other things is who got in— important, but the other things is who got in his _ important, but the other things is who got in his ear— important, but the other things is who got in his ear after— important, but the other things is who got in his ear after that? - important, but the other things is i who got in his ear after that? maybe someone. _ who got in his ear after that? maybe someone. a — who got in his ear after that? maybe someone, a constitutionalist, - who got in his ear after that? maybe someone, a constitutionalist, said . someone, a constitutionalist, said for the _ someone, a constitutionalist, said for the constitution, _ someone, a constitutionalist, said for the constitution, you - someone, a constitutionalist, said for the constitution, you can - someone, a constitutionalist, said for the constitution, you can do i for the constitution, you can do this _ for the constitution, you can do this if— for the constitution, you can do this. if donald _ for the constitution, you can do this. if donald trump— for the constitution, you can do this. if donald trump in- for the constitution, you can do this. if donald trump in his - for the constitution, you can do. this. if donald trump in his heart of hearts— this. if donald trump in his heart of hearts believes _ this. if donald trump in his heart of hearts believes he _ this. if donald trump in his heart

of hearts believes he got - this. if donald trump in his heart of hearts believes he got more . this. if donald trump in his heart - of hearts believes he got more votes than any— of hearts believes he got more votes than any other— of hearts believes he got more votes than any other presidential— than any other presidential candidate _ than any other presidential candidate in— than any other presidential candidate in previous - than any other presidential. candidate in previous history. looking — candidate in previous history. looking at _ candidate in previous history. looking at the _ candidate in previous history. looking at the vote _ candidate in previous history. looking at the vote count, i candidate in previous history. looking at the vote count, ifi candidate in previous history. l looking at the vote count, if he said _ looking at the vote count, if he said "there's _ looking at the vote count, if he said "there's no _ looking at the vote count, if he said "there's no way _ looking at the vote count, if he said "there's no way i - looking at the vote count, if he said "there's no way i could'vel looking at the vote count, if he - said "there's no way i could've lost these _ said "there's no way i could've lost these cities — said "there's no way i could've lost these cities and _ said "there's no way i could've lost these cities and states _ said "there's no way i could've lost these cities and states and - said "there's no way i could've losti these cities and states and someone and _ these cities and states and someone and someone _ these cities and states and someone and someone else _ these cities and states and someone and someone else told _ these cities and states and someone and someone else told him - these cities and states and someone and someone else told him x, i these cities and states and someonej and someone else told him x, y, and z. _ and someone else told him x, y, and 2. he _ and someone else told him x, y, and 2. he may— and someone else told him x, y, and 2, he may have _ and someone else told him x, y, and 2, he may have changed - and someone else told him x, y, and 2, he may have changed his - and someone else told him x, y, l and 2, he may have changed his mind. i'm and 2, he may have changed his mind. i'm thinking _ and 2, he may have changed his mind. i'm thinking he's— and 2, he may have changed his mind. i'm thinking he's probably— and 2, he may have changed his mind. i'm thinking he's probably looking - i'm thinking he's probably looking as he's— i'm thinking he's probably looking as he's going _ i'm thinking he's probably looking as he's going to— i'm thinking he's probably looking as he's going to fight. _ i'm thinking he's probably looking as he's going to fight. but, - i'm thinking he's probably looking as he's going to fight.— as he's going to fight. but, miles ta lor, as he's going to fight. but, miles taylor. the _ as he's going to fight. but, miles taylor, the people _ as he's going to fight. but, miles taylor, the people who _ as he's going to fight. but, miles taylor, the people who he - as he's going to fight. but, miles taylor, the people who he gave i taylor, the people who he gave evidence to — his attorney—general, his deputy attorney—general, his joint chief, his chief of staff, we now know was advising him that there was no fraud — the courts were telling and there is no fraud, and according to this indictment, he went to find alternative legal counsel people who would support the case that he was setting out, is that right?— case that he was setting out, is that rirht? . , .,. that right? yeah, the place where jennifer's completely _ that right? yeah, the place where jennifer's completely wrong - that right? yeah, the place where jennifer's completely wrong is - that right? yeah, the place where l jennifer's completely wrong is when a criminal— jennifer's completely wrong is when a criminal in their heart of hearts thinks _ a criminal in their heart of hearts thinks they're not a criminal, it

doesn't — thinks they're not a criminal, it doesn't absolve him of crime. i think— doesn't absolve him of crime. i think in— doesn't absolve him of crime. i think in this case, there is a mountain— think in this case, there is a mountain of evidence that donald trump _ mountain of evidence that donald trump knew what he was doing. was not constitutional, it was not legal. — not constitutional, it was not legal, and he went forward and would do it again _ legal, and he went forward and would do it again. we actually set up with his awareness a system to make sure that 2020 _ his awareness a system to make sure that 2020 was the most secure presidential election in american history — presidential election in american history i— presidential election in american history. i was a part of briefings to the _ history. i was a part of briefings to the president. he never expressed dissent _ to the president. he never expressed dissent about those measures, and in fact, dissent about those measures, and in fact. it's _ dissent about those measures, and in fact. it's very— dissent about those measures, and in fact, it's very telling that when his own — fact, it's very telling that when his own top head of election security. _ his own top head of election security, my former colleague, went out and _ security, my former colleague, went out and claimed after the election that it _ out and claimed after the election that it was — out and claimed after the election that it was indeed the most secure election. _ that it was indeed the most secure election, the president fired him for making that statement because he no longer— for making that statement because he no longer wanted it to be secure because — no longer wanted it to be secure because it — no longer wanted it to be secure because it ran contrary to his intentions _ because it ran contrary to his intentions to try to claim fraud. again. — intentions to try to claim fraud. again. this— intentions to try to claim fraud. again, this top election official who have _ again, this top election official who have the knowledge informed him

directly— who have the knowledge informed him directly on _ who have the knowledge informed him directly on multiple occasions that the election was secure, the fraud allegations were fake and donald trump _ allegations were fake and donald trump went in search of contrary evidence — trump went in search of contrary evidence. �* . . trump went in search of contrary evidence. �* , , ., , ., evidence. and this is the top of the s . here for evidence. and this is the top of the sphere forjack _ evidence. and this is the top of the sphere forjack smith, _ evidence. and this is the top of the sphere forjack smith, kelly, - sphere forjack smith, kelly, because i went through the document last night knowing or knowingly, appears around 36 times in the document. that is the point the special counsel will make. absolutely, and that's a very, very valid point, absolutely — he knew what he was doing, but he still did it anyway. i think that is key, i think it's important to remember that. as mike pence came out and said, which is very telling of his thoughts, the fact about the indictment that when a person puts themselves over the constitution, that person should not be the president of the united states. i think that is key.— think that is key. kelly, it's not included in _ think that is key. kelly, it's not included in the _ think that is key. kelly, it's not

included in the house - think that is key. kelly, it's not included in the house referral, j think that is key. kelly, it's not - included in the house referral, this charge of conspiring against people's right to have their votes counted, which is pretty interesting because it relates to criminal statute, which goes all the way back to reconstruction. the 1870s, the period after the civil war, correct? yes, that's a really good point, and that's what the united states have been built on, that people get out there and they vote and their vote is supposed to matter. that we live in a democracy, not in a dictatorship, and that people's right to vote under the constitution is a fundamental right for someone to vote and key for them to have access to the polls and their vote to matter and not their vote to be changed. to matter and not their vote to be chanred. , . , to matter and not their vote to be chanred. . , changed. just very quickly, jennifer- — changed. just very quickly, jennifer. do _ changed. just very quickly, jennifer. do you _ changed. just very quickly, jennifer. do you have - changed. just very quickly, jennifer. do you have any i changed. just very quickly, - jennifer. do you have any concerns that with that in mind, you got that on one side and then you have president trump saying this is political persecution and

interference because he's top of the polls for the primaries? is this not the same playbook we had in 2020 that already, republicans are starting to cast doubts about the result in 202a? i starting to cast doubts about the result in 2024?— result in 2024? i believe that -eo . le result in 2024? i believe that peeple are — result in 2024? i believe that people are where _ result in 2024? i believe that people are where they - result in 2024? i believe that people are where they are. l result in 2024? i believe that - people are where they are. either they believe — people are where they are. either they believe it _ people are where they are. either they believe it wasn't _ people are where they are. either they believe it wasn't as - people are where they are. either they believe it wasn't as secure . people are where they are. eitherl they believe it wasn't as secure as most _ they believe it wasn't as secure as most people — they believe it wasn't as secure as most people think, _ they believe it wasn't as secure as most people think, or— they believe it wasn't as secure as most people think, or some - they believe it wasn't as secure as i most people think, or some believe it is _ most people think, or some believe it is the _ most people think, or some believe it is. the bottom _ most people think, or some believe it is. the bottom line _ most people think, or some believe it is. the bottom line is _ most people think, or some believe it is. the bottom line is no - it is. the bottom line is no election— it is. the bottom line is no election is— it is. the bottom line is no election is 100%. - it is. the bottom line is no election is 100%. you - it is. the bottom line is no - election is 100%. you will have fraud _ election is 100%. you will have fraud and — election is 100%. you will have fraud and there's _ election is 100%. you will have fraud and there's been - election is 100%. you will have i fraud and there's been individuals charged _ fraud and there's been individuals charged from _ fraud and there's been individuals charged from the _ fraud and there's been individuals charged from the last _ fraud and there's been individuals charged from the last election - fraud and there's been individuals charged from the last election ori charged from the last election or dead _ charged from the last election or dead people _ charged from the last election or dead people voting _ charged from the last election or dead people voting or— charged from the last election or. dead people voting or unaccounted charged from the last election or- dead people voting or unaccounted or lrallots— dead people voting or unaccounted or ballots that _ dead people voting or unaccounted or ballots that are _ dead people voting or unaccounted or ballots that are duplicated. _ dead people voting or unaccounted or ballots that are duplicated. you - ballots that are duplicated. you can't _ ballots that are duplicated. you can't say — ballots that are duplicated. you can't say no _ ballots that are duplicated. you can't say no and _ ballots that are duplicated. you can't say no and shake - ballots that are duplicated. you can't say no and shake your- ballots that are duplicated. you . can't say no and shake your head. with— can't say no and shake your head. with regards— can't say no and shake your head. with regards to _ can't say no and shake your head. with regards to donald _ can't say no and shake your head. with regards to donald trump, i can't say no and shake your head. - with regards to donald trump, people on tpoth— with regards to donald trump, people on both sides — with regards to donald trump, people on both sides feel— with regards to donald trump, people on both sides feel the _ with regards to donald trump, people on both sides feel the way— with regards to donald trump, people on both sides feel the way they - with regards to donald trump, people on both sides feel the way they do, i on both sides feel the way they do, those _ on both sides feel the way they do, those that— on both sides feel the way they do, those that will believe _ on both sides feel the way they do, those that will believe him - on both sides feel the way they do, those that will believe him believel those that will believe him believe this is— those that will believe him believe this is weaponisation _ those that will believe him believe this is weaponisation of— those that will believe him believe this is weaponisation of the - this is weaponisation of the government— this is weaponisation of the government to _ this is weaponisation of the government to keep - this is weaponisation of the government to keep him i this is weaponisation of the i government to keep him out this is weaponisation of the - government to keep him out of an election— government to keep him out of an election will— government to keep him out of an election will be _ government to keep him out of an election will be leaving _ government to keep him out of an election will be leaving that - election will be leaving that as well _

election will be leaving that as well. ~ ., . well. we will get to the defence in the second — well. we will get to the defence in the second half— well. we will get to the defence in the second half of _ well. we will get to the defence in the second half of this _ well. we will get to the defence in the second half of this hour. - well. we will get to the defence in the second half of this hour. miles taylor has to leave us, he's booked at the moment so he's everywhere. but he will be back tomorrow, hopefully, when we talk about donald trump's arraignment in the court. hello there. this is not the sort of weather we'd get this time of the year usually, and we have to wait until later, next week for any significant improvements. now, today, earlier on, we had gusts of 60mph on the isle of wight — the winds are not as strong now, along the south coast of england. and there was some sunshine around as well here and there in between the downpours. and this was the radar from earlier on — we had some thundery downpours developing across some southern parts of the uk, and that more persistent rain across northern parts of england keeping it particularly chilly here. and it's all been due to yet another area of low pressure that steered right over the uk — and that was storm patricia, named by the french met service,

with greater impacts across that part of europe. but things are going to calm down as we head into the night because the strong, gusty winds will continue to ease, the more persistent rain and thunderstorms move away, it does turn drier — some clearer spells developing later on in places, as well, and temperatures by dawn around about 11—13 celsius. storm patricia, that area of low pressure will be heading into southern scandinavia, taking the wet and windy weather with it. and then, as we head into thursday, the wind direction changes. we get a cooler north—to—northwesterly breeze, but it may well be a dry day for many places. there'll be some sunshine, particularly early on. cloud will build up, though, almost anywhere could see a shower, and some of them will be heavy and thundery — especially, i think, across southeast scotland and northern parts of england. but if you get a bit of shelter from that northerly wind, places like glasgow could see temperatures up to 20 celsius. it should be warmer in the southeast, as well, with fewer showers around here. but that's not really the story on friday —

again, most of the showers down the eastern side of england, thundery downpours developing in the southeast and east anglia this time. probably not quite as windy on friday, and many western areas will have a dry day with some sunshine. but again, it's not that warm — 18 celsius in belfast, 19 in cardiff at best here. still cooler air over the next few days, because the jet stream is to the south of the uk, and then, it's going to come right over the uk — and that means we could see another area of low pressure heading our way by the time we get into saturday. another weekend, another area of low pressure, more wet and windy weather, a bit like today. the worst of it across england and wales.

hello, i'm christian fraser. you're watching the context on bbc news. donald trump is expected to appear in court in washington on thursday — we'll look ahead to how the republican party is likely to respond. we are going to look in this second half hour at tomorrow's arraingment in washington, and also at the republican response to this indictment. you will be aware that in the latest nyt sienna college poll donald trump is leading his nearest challenger, gov ron desantis by a landslide 37

percentage points nationally among the likely primary electorate. we will talk tojennifer about how ron de santis might campaign from here on in. but before we do that lets just break down the poll into some of the more relevant parts. republicans in the poll were asked — do you think trump has committed any serious federal crimes? 51% say no. 35% think he did, 1a% say they don't know. i wonder if those people will read the indictment in full. what are your views on trump s actions after the 2020 election? 53 per cent he went too far threatening us democracy. 39 per cent think he was merely exercising his right to contest the election. and of course donald trump will feed that resentment and the suspicion. last night, his campaign put out this statement, the lawlessness of these persecutions of president trump and his supporters is reminiscent of nazi germany in the 1930s

the former soviet union and other authoritarian dictatorial regimes.