c co-incidental. maybe making escalatory steps like this to sort of feed the narrative that's being pushed inside moscow that russia's in fact at war with the entire nato bloc. not true nato is supplying weapons and training but not in the fight. many concerned about another possible night of attacks. we just heard sirens here. and this really part of the nightly fear of ordinary civilian ukrainians. >> stay safe over there in zaporizhzhia in ukraine. we'll be in touch. and to our viewers, thanks very much for watching. i'm wolf blitzer in "the situation room." this note, i'll be back tomorrow at 1:00 p.m. eastern for cnn's special live coverage of donald trump's arraignment here in washington. "erin burnett outfront" starts "erin burnett outfront" starts right now. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com "outfront" next, trump in court. the former president expected to face a judge in person in less than 24 hours as his attorney

lays out trump's defense, claiming trump was just following orders from a trusted attorney, john eastman. eastman's attorney is "outfront," along with famed constitutional scholar lawrence tribe. plus, um in flames. putin's military recruitment centers are being attacked against russia. who is behind it, and we have new details tonight on why russian priests are telling fighters that their mission is to die. just into cnn tonight, we have new reporting on what finally convinced president biden to publicly acknowledge his seventh grandchild, hunter biden's 4-year-old daughter navy. let's go "outfront." and good evening. i'm erin burnett. "outfront" tonight, trump headed to court. in less than 24 hours, former president donald trump will make his court appearance in washington. now, his appearance right now is scheduled for 4:00 eastern. trump will have his fingerprints taken digitally. a mugshot lwill not be taken.

but at this hour, security at the d.c. courthouse is extremely tight. police are monitoring online chatter for potential threats, secret service, law enforcement agencies also doing dry runs, they're walking through the building. all of this is unfolding now just hours before trump arrives in the city. capitol hill is also on high alert. today there was a security scare that sent staffers running. tomorrow, of course, marks trump's third arraignment in four months. the first for ledly falsifying business records, the second related to classified documents. and now in less than 24 hours, trump is expected to plead not guilty to four counts, including copiracy to defraud the united states of america. the frontrunner in the republican presidential field is facing a whopping 78 criminal total charges, 78 charges in three separate criminal cases. trump's attorney in the january 6th case is arguing trump's efforts to overturn the election were based on legal advice from conservative attorney john

eastman. he is one of the six co-conspirators in trump's indictment. >> what president trump had was an actual opinion of counsel that his request to vice president pence was completely lawful and completely constitutional. >> he also had many, many opinions of his own white house counsel that that was not legal. >> you're entitled to advice of counsel. you have one of the leading constitutional scholars in the united states john eastman, say to president trump, this is a protocol that you can follow, it's legal. that eliminates criminal intent. >> so he's laying it all on john eastman. well, the special counsel alleges that eastman was one of the architects behind trump's attempts to overturn the election. in a moment i'm going to speak exclusively with eastman's attorney. becal of this comes as "the new york time ishedding new light on who could be co-conspirator number six in trump's indictment. this person is described as a political consultant who helped implement a plan to submit

fraudulent slates of presidential electors to obstruct the certification proceeding. and according to "the new york times," boris epshteyn, may be the individual. to rudy giuliani in december of 2020, which is referenced in the indictment. that email, according to "the times" reads, in part, quote dear mayor, as discussed, below are the attorneys i would recommend for the memo on choosing electors. so far, his attorney is refusing to comment on this report. but there is so much to get to tonight. i want to begin with evan perez because he is outside the federal courthouse where trump will appear to tomorrow in washington. what are you learning about what is going to happen tomorrow? >> reporter: there's a lot of security preparation. so what is really going to be a very, very short hearing with this magistrate judge tomorrow here at the courthouse behind me. we expect that the former president is going to be brought in very quickly into the

courthouse. the fingerprinting process, the processing process should be a lot faster because, of course, this was done very, very recently down by the u.s. marshals down in miami for the other case, the mar-a-lago case. we expect that the hearing will also include an arraignment. he will be informed of the charges. and then the judge will begin setting a schedule for a possible trial. we know that he has drawn a very tough judge. and that judge has expressed her intentions that anybody who had something to do with january 6th, that they should face the consequences. this is a courthouse that's right across from the west front of the capitol where a lot of the most horrific violence happened on january 6th. and she has also been very tough on the former president. she wrote the very strong opinion saying that presidents are not kings when she turned back his attempt to try to keep his white house records from the

january 6th committee. so we expect that this is going to be the beginning of a process that should get a trial that could happen within a year. now, the former president, of course, wants to delay this beyond the election. we'll see whether judge tanya chutkan will agree with that. erin? >> evan, thank you very much. and, as promised now, i'm joined by john eastman's attorney. he is representing multiple clients in special counsel's jack smith investigation. but we are focusing on eastman tonight. and i very much appreciate your time, charles. let me just start to try to understand where exactly your client stands. obviously, he's labeled co-conspirator number 2 in the indictment. just to be clear, has your client, john eastman, been indicted at this time? >> no. well, thank you very much for having me on. and absolutely no, john eastman has not been indicted on this time. we very much think he should not be. have you been in touch with the

special counsel's office since the indictment was revealed yesterday? >> we have not. >> okay. now, is there any chance that your client would cooperate with the special counsel jack smith? >> well, i think it depends on what you mean by cooperate. dr. eastman is happy to tell his side of the story, to talk about the issues he believes are important to the constitution and the country. and under the right circumstances certainly he would share those views and share his recollections of everything that happened in 2020 with the special counsel. but if by cooperation you mean flipping on donald trump or providing incriminating information, then absolutely not, simply because those aren't the facts of this case, as it pertains to dr. eastman. >> i want to get to those in a moment. but you say under the right circumstances, but you don't describe it as flipping. what kinds of circumstances would that be? obviously, he's in this indictment listed as a

co-conspirator. so people anticipate that there likely will be an indictment. so i'm just trying to understand what does "under the right circumstances" mean? >> well, i think if we thought that there was an opportunity to engage with special counsel in a manner that we could be assured that they had an open mind about the truth and we could attempt to explain some of the circumstances that might've led them to name him as an unindicted co-conspirator. because we do believe there are some serious misunderstandings. if you read the indictment, there's much i could talk about, about that. and under the right circumstances, we'd be happy to have that dialogue with mr. smith or with his assistant, certainly we would. >> all right. but if i am trying to understand what you're saying that there would be some sort of immunity involved, you're talking about the misunderstandings, as you see them in here, that would be fair? >> immunity would be great. we'd be happy to receive it, but i'm not sitting here saying we would insist on that. >> so you'd do it for less than immunity? >> certainly. >> like what? >> because dr. eastman has nothing to hide in the situation. he's been very open about his role.

he's made numerous tv appearances. he's written articles on it. he's been very much an open book, as his attorneys have, to a certain extent, about his activities in 2020. he has nothing to hide, he committed no crimes. and under the right circumstances, we look forward to having that dialogue with the special counsel. >> so let me get to the heart of this then, because what i just played, and i know you heard a moment ago, trump's current lawyer speaking this morning. his defense, the former president's defense, to say that your client told him what to do, and he just did it. he said, and i quote him this morning, there you saw him with savannah. you had one of the leading constitutional scholars in the united states, john eastman, say to president trump, this is a protocol that you can follow, it's legal. that eliminates criminal intent. so he's blaming your client, not his. is trump throwing eastman under the bus? >> absolutely not. and thank you for giving me the opportunity to talk about that.

and i respectfully disagree with the phrasing that he's blaming our client. in fact, i have absolutely no qualms with any of the statements from mr. laro, and he's made a couple other statements to that effect. mr. trump did have a right to rely on his advice. dr. eastman stands by that advice, and he'd give largely the same advice, i think, if the situation repeated itself today. and that really is the heart of this case. i agree with you, dr. eastman is now looking at possibly the threat of indictment for acting as an attorney, making arguments on behalf of his client, prosecuting attorneys for doing that which is their jobs, i submit, would be a very troubling prospect if the special counsel indeed takes that step. >> so, you dispute that trump's lawyer saying that his counsel told him to do this, and therefore it's fine, it's not trump's problem, that is not throwing trump under the bus? >> i don't think it's throwing john eastman under the bus.

>> sorry, i misspoke, yeah. >> that's correct. i don't interpret it as throwing him under the bus at all. i have no problem with m mr. laro's statements at well. >> what the indictment alleges that your client did, of course, in terms of the advice, crucial advice, they lay out meetings, they talk about who is in these meetings early in january, before january 6th, january 4th and january 5th, eastman, your client, meets with the president, the vice president, and the defendant, trump, and eastman ask the vice president to either unilaterally reject the legitimate electors from the seven targeted states or send the question of which elector slate was legitimate to the state legislatures. so they say that happened. the next day they say it happened again on the morning of january 5th at trump's direction, there is this meeting with eastman, eastman advocates that the vice president do what he preferred the day before, unilaterally reject electors from the targeted states. this is the heart of the matter,

that trump is saying that your client told pence to go ahead and do it, reject the electors from the states, it's fine, there's no problem with it. did that not happen? >> well, i would add a little bit of nuance there. dr. eastman is on record several times stating that his recommended course of action was not to unilaterally reject the electors peremptorily on january 6th. his recommendation was simply to send the matter back to the states, many of the legislatures of which had yet to complete their investigations of the various allegations were out there, pursuant to their power as state legislatures. and then report back to vice president pence and the electoral college on whatever their findings were. and dr. eastman's longer memo, spells out several situations, three or four situations, in which this process might've resulted in affirming now president biden's victory. so it wasn't simply a scheme to

keep president trump in power by whatever means necessary. everybody involved knew that this process could result in nothing other than biden and vice president harris being inaugurated as they were. >> the further point though, then that happens in this indictment. it says on january 4th, that your client, john eastman, met with the president and vice president, and then asked pence to unilaterally reject or send the slates back to legislatures, as you and i are talking about. the indictment then goes on to say on that same day wn eastman acknowledged to the defendant's senior adviser that no court would support his proposal, the senior adviser told eastman you're going to cause riots in the streets. eastman responded that there had previously been points in nation's history where violence was necessary to protect the republic. now, on this point, charles, the takeaway here, of course, is not veiled. the line says that your client felt that this was a point in

history where violence could be justified to protect the republic. is that accurate, does he stand by that? >> oh, absolutely not. and i have two points to make about that. the first is those allegations being familiar with the investigation of this case, are drawn from the one-sided recounting of that conversation from mr. jacob is the individual referred to there. >> that's the senior adviser. >> that's right, to the chief counsel of vice president pence. i would just ask your viewers to imagine if they were ever involved in a contentious argument, how they would feel if the substance of that argument were to be communicated to the world solely by their adversary. i'm not accusing mr. jacob of anything, but that's just his version of what happened. and there is significant nuance there. dr. eastman never called for violence or anything close to that. it was simply a discussion of what would likely happen if some of the issues that the two gentlemen were debating were to make their way through the courts, and there's much more we would add to the highly

selective presentation of that conversation included in the indictment, which is a common problem we've seen in this indictment that there's a quote here, and a quote there, and the full context isn't there. there's no obligation for him to put his defense in there, but i think it's important to understand that when you see these three or or four-word. >> just to understand, though, you're just saying context is missing, you're not saying he didn't say what's in here. >> i'm not conceding the quote at all that some aspects of mr. jacob's characterizations are accurate or at least roughly accurate. some are not. and anything involving calling for violence we would dispute certainly. that's completely inconsistent. >> obviously he has been a world-renowned -- nationally renowned constitutional scholar. let me just ask one other thing to understand because there are some very specific allegations in here. we just talked about a couple of

them. there are others. when jack smith lays out accusations involving your client in terms of organizing the fraudulent slates of electors, just in arizona, he says the arizona house speaker explained that state investigators had uncovered no evidence of substantial fraud in the state. eastman concedes that he didn't know enough about facts on the ground in arizona, but nonethes told the arizona house speaker to decertify and let the court sort it out. the arizona house speaker refused, stating that he would not play with the oath he had taken to uphold the united states constitution and arizona law. the arizona house speaker is rusty bowers. did your client tell him to decertify the results and let the court sort it out? >> not in those terms or anywhere close to that. dr. eastman's role in this is he was not a forensic investigator. he wasn't there examining the machines or going through the ballots. he was the constitutional scholar. so his main role with respect to

state legislatures in particular, as you mentioned, was to educate state legislators on their constitutional power in elections, which many of them, through no fault of their own, certainly weren't familiar with. with respect to arizona, georgia, dr. eastman educated the legislatures on what the constitution said about their power in elections. and it was largely up to them to look at the investigations, consider the evidence, and decide if there was any basis to exercise that authority. and the important thing to remember is before any state legislature could take any action with respect to the election, a majority of that body, these are representatives elected by the people, accomplished individuals, would have to vote in favor of that if dr. eastman or whoever else was making similar arguments couldn't convince a majority of the state legislature that they had the power and grounds existed to use it, then nothing would happen, as ultimately nothing did happen. >> charles, i appreciate your time. thank you very much. >> thank you for having me. i appreciate it. >> he is representing john eastman, who is at the core of

this. "outfront" now, harvard law school professor. professor, let me give you a chance to respond. you heard him say that his client does not have an issue with president trump saying that he did everything he did at the recommendation and behest of john eastman, and then he says that that is not throwing john eastman under the bus. >> well, i don't know what bus they're talking about. and i also don't know what kind of constitutional expert john eastman is. i know he's an advocate. i've never read any significant scholarship he wrote, except this crazy theory about the independent state legislatures, which even a very conservative u.s. supreme court decisively rejected, rejected just this june. but i'm looking at the details of the indictment, all 45 pages. i recommend that after the kind of gobble ygook.

at 11:44 p.m. on the infamous day january 6th, there was a statement quoted from co-conspirator 2, john eastman, this is an email. he said, i implore you to consider one more relatively minor violation of the electoral to postpone everything for ten days so the legislatures could perform this crazy function, which the u.s. supreme court said they can't perform without complying with their own state constitutions. this is all nonsense. there is no constitutional defense. when john eastman is indicted, we can listen to what kind of defense he has.

but i know the law in this area. i've taught it for 50 years. there's no defense here. they're simply playing for time. they want the american people to say we don't care if these people were going to overthrow the election. judge carter, david carter, a distinguished federal judge in california, in march of 2022, said that if the plot that john eastman and donald trump were hatching together had succeeded, we would have ended our democracy, we would no longer have a peaceful transition of power to the official winner of an election. that is serious. i don't think lawyers should play games about things like this. >> well, i want to play a little bit more of what trump's attorney said today, about his defense. because trump, who has been indicted, obviously, is making his defense of, well, it was eastman who told me what to do. let me play part of what he said. >> you had one of the leading

constitutional scholars in the united states, john eastman, say to president trump, this is a protocol that you can follow, it's legal. that eliminates criminal intent. >> okay. does it eliminate criminal intent? >> all of his own lawyers, the white house counsel, all of the real lawyers were telling him you can't do this. we just heard vice president pence, former vice president pence say today that the kooky lawyers were kind of concocting these schemes. we know that even donald trump is smart enough to know that he doesn't have the power to have his own vice president put him in power over the election of the people of the united states. what's he going to do? is he going to say that kamala harris could keep biden in power if it looks like the electoral college has gone for trump? it's nonsense. that's not the way it works, folks. it's not the way the rules are

written. the electoral, the constitution. they're making it up. and for any defendant to say i can plan to overthrow the election as long as i can find some crazy lawyer somewhere to tell me, oh, you've got the power, you can do it, whatever you want because you're president, that's what he has said. he's basically said i'm president, i have all the powers, look at article two. the fact that you find somebody to say that doesn't mean that you've got a legal defense. this indictment very carefully shows that all of the people involved knew that they were making it up as they went along, that there was no evidence. sometimes they say, oh, but we have theories. well, theories are very nice in a classroom, i love teaching. but you don't overthrow an election on the basis of theories. you need facts. there were no facts here. they lost all of the lawsuits where they tried to float these

nonsense ideas. and now they're basically saying to the american people, even if this trial is over with, even if there is a conviction, put us back in power, we'll pardon ourselves and we'll go on, but there will never be another free and fair election. >> point number three was saying, in a sense, jack smith was saying you have a right to say that an election is stolen. that's a right. to try to put it out there that this isn't a first amendment issue. and, yet, that is what we are hearing from trump's team. trump's attorney saying this is an attack on free speech. so, how do you, as someone who spent 50 years in this space talking about political speech, if the indictment says you can go ahead and falsely claim this, that is free speech, but that's not what this is about. did the indictment make the case?

>> the indictment makes the case completely. the fact that words are used doesn't mean it's free speech. i can say give me your -- like a holdup note at a bank, give me your money or i'll shoot your head up. that's speech, but it's also bank robbery. you can say that all the money in the u.s. mint belongs to me. but the moment you start grabbing it, that's not speech anymore. even if you use words to grab it, that doesn't give you a free speech defense. give me a break. >> also, professor, i appreciate your time. thank you. >> thanks. and, next, new signs pointing to trump chief of staff mark meadows, possibly cooperating with jack smith. did he flip on his old boss, and how crucial is he in this 45-page indictment? a special report on him coming up. plus, all eyes are on georgia now, where any day trump could be indicted for a third time. the fulton county sheriff is "outfront" on his preparations for a possible indictment, and why he says trump would be treated like any other

defendant, fingerprints, mugshots and all. video into "outfront" as ukraine steps up attacks in moscow. zelenskyy's adviser telling "outfront" there is much more to come. me put a reminder on my phone. on the top of thehe pile! oh. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. libiberty. ♪ our ears connect us to the moments that matter. give them the nutrients they need with lipo. it's formulated with ingredients clinically shown to protect your ears from dizziness ear ringing, and even hring loss. ver miss a moment with lipo flavonoid. ♪( please don't go by harry casey, richard raymond finch )♪ ( ♪ ♪ ) ♪ (please don't go) ♪ ♪ (please don't go) ♪ ♪ (please don't go) ♪ ♪ (please don't go) ♪ ♪ (don't gooo) ♪ ( ♪ ♪ )

♪ (don't go away) ♪ pre-order now and get a free storage upgrade. ♪ (please don't go) ♪ think hairspray's stuck in one dimension? think again. flex any style... with hairspray that flexes with you. new tresemmé hairspray.

new tonight, growing speculation that former white house chief of staff mark meadows is cooperating with the justice department, and, in fact, may have been doing so for a long time. this after he was not named as a

co-conspirator in special counsel's jack smith's indictment of donald trump for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. this is despite meadows being a major witness in all of the meetings related to that effort. >> mark meadows at this point -- and you're right, joe -- at this point was not, as far as a definition, not on the descriptors for the co-conspirators. >> i assume that he's made all his information known to the department of justice. and he knows a lot. >> i think that lends a lot of credence to the theory that he is working with or cooperating with or has provided significant information to jack smith. >> tom foreman is "outfront." >> reporter: before the mob raged, before police were beaten and lawmakers ran, there was white house chief of staff mark meadows telling his aide cassidy hutchinson, according to her

testimony -- >> there's a lot going on, cass, but, i don't know, things might get real, real bad on january 6th. that evening was the first moment that i remember feeling scared. >> this is about donald trump and about actually going after him once again. >> reporter: although meadows dismissed the committee's work early on, if anyone knew then president trump's plans for the lost election, it might have been meadows. >> i just want to find 11,780 votes. >> reporter: after all, he joined that phone call when trump leaned on georgia's top election official to overturn his loss there. >> we believe that not every vote or fair vote and legal vote was counted. >> reporter: the latest indictment notes at one point meadows told trump the georgia officials were doing an exemplary job, but one day later trump called them terrible

people covering up fraud anyway. >> the ultimate check and balance is the united states congress. >> reporter: on january 5th, congressman jim jordan messaged meadows, insisting vice president mike pence should call out all electoral votes that he believes are unconstitutional and stop certification. meadows response, i have pushed for this, not sure it is going to happen. and when the mob tried to violently force what pence would not, could not do, donald trump jr. messaged that his father had to act, he's got to condemn this. meadows' reply, i am pushing it hard, i agree. witnesses place meadows in meeting after meeting with others who were allegedly pushing slates of fake electors, disingenerous lawsuits, and bogus claims of bad voting machines, saying little about it publicly. meadows sat down with the grand jury earlier this year, and since then he's been even more tight-lipped, spurring some to wonder if what mark meadows is not saying speaks volumes.

>> that looks to me like somebody who's cooperating with the federal government. >> reporter: to be clear, we do not know if mark meadows is cooperating with the government. we do not know if he's in any legal jeopardy. but we do know earlier this spring team trump wasn't very happy that he kind of went underground. and we also know a lot of people in this town right now would very much like to know where mark meadows stands. >> thank you very much, tom. ryan goodman is "outfront" with me, "outfront" legal analyst. when you put all this together, like chris christie's way of saying it, this very much looks like someone cooperating with the federal government. do you think that that's what's happened? and now in the context of the 45-page indictment, how powerful is he if he's flipped? >> so i think he's cooperating. and, in some sense, it was already indicated by other things that we knew before, but the indictment, the fact that it

does not list him as a co-conspirator where he has as much legal jeopardy as, say, giuliani. and then everything that paints him in terms of what his role is does not paint him in a picture of somebody who's doing wrong but rather somebody who'd be a cooperating witness. then there's also some nuggets where there's one particular conversation between meadows and trump directly when meadows is down in georgia, and he reports back to trump that the people there conducting the investigation -- >> say it's being exemplary fashion. >> it sounds like it's coming either directly from him, in all likelihood, or that they know that he will could be rroborate information. >> his lawyers had no contact with meadows or his team. and team trump is in the dark on what meadows was doing with their role. that's may, june, july. that's at least three months. is that -- i mean, could it be that?

could it be longer? and does time matter? >> time matters in many ways because it also would mean that he maybe helped them get to other witnesses, other information that they would have built up a robust amount of evidence. it was cnn that first scooped that there was no contact between meadows side and trump's side in may. the "new york times" followed in up in june and said that that situation had already existed for months. so that's already several months plus the three that you identified. that's a long period of time. it almost overlaps with how long jack smith's been around. that's a long period of time. and in answer to your other question, meadows is all over this indictment. he really does hold the keys to the kingdom. that would be a star witness. and he was running point from what we know from the select committee on the false electors scheme, for example. he would have very valuable information about what trump knew, what trump said. >> and so in a trial he would be there? >> he would. the only caveat is, i think, that we would want to know does

mark meadows accept responsibility for having done wrong? if he didn't, then he's a little bit of a kpcomplicated witness. >> i was there doing what they were doing. >> and then trump says, well, i was doing what he was doing. then if he didn't do anything wrong, nor did i. that's the kind of key question here as well, did he flip but then accept some kind of legal -- >> and that would be part of a formal agreement, correct, whether he did or didn't. >> that's right. >> ryan, thank you very much. next, georgia now taking center stage as trump could soon be indicted in atlanta for trying to overturn the 2020 election. the city already barricading the area around the courthouse. what are the plans for trump if he's indicted? the fulton county sheriff is next. and we have this new video into "outfront" tonight. this is ukraine's kamikaze drones in action as we are learning new details tonight about who may be behind the rash of attacks on russian military recruitment centers.

♪ ♪ we're reinventing our network... ...with smarter, more efficient routes... ...so you can deliver more value to your customers. fast. reliable. perfectlorchestrated. the united states postal service. (♪) astepro allergy, steroid free allergy relief that starts working in 30 minutes, while other allergy sprays take hours. with astepro's unbeatably fast allergy relief you can astepro and go!

okay everyone, our mission is complete balanced nutrition. together we provide nutrients to support immune, muscle, bone, and heart health. yaaay! woo hoo! ensure with 25 vitamins and minerals and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪ he snores like an angry rhino. you've never heard an angry rhino. baby i hear one every night. every night. okay. i'll work on that. save up to $500 on the new sleep number® smart bed. plus, free home delivery when you add an adjustable base. shop now only at sleep number®.

new tonight, georgia republican secretary of state brad raffensperger speaking out

about donald trump's historic indictment for trying to overturn the 2020 election. something that raffensperger, of course, resisted every step of the way. >> i've been consistent since day one, that there weren't thousands of dead people. we had found four. and there weren't 66,000 underaged voters, there were zero. there were zero nonregistered voter. we made sure that we had the facts for every allegation. >> his comments come as trump is facing a fourth criminal indictment in the state of georgia. and right now i want to show you the courthouse in fulton county, surrounded by security barriers as the d.a. fani willis has set her probe, and that she is ready to go with charging decisions. "outfront" now, fulton county sheriff patrick labat. he is responsible for security around the fulton county courthouse. and sheriff, of course, we can see the work that your team has already done to surround that

courthouse. how imminent do you think a possible indictment is? >> well, again, thank you for having us here in fulton county. we expect -- we're preparing for both sides of the coin, if you will. we are serious about safety and security of that courthouse. and so we are preparing as though an indictment is forthcoming. >> tell me about those preparations. what are you doing? >> we've been meeting here daily over the last few weeks. we are certainly partnering with our partners at the atlanta police department, the chief and his team working with four or five different sheriff's offices in the metro area really focusing on creating a false multiplier so that we have the necessary resources to keep our community safe. >> so if former president trump is indicted by fani willis, sheriff, could you walk me through what happens -- he's going to show up for arraignment

tomorrow in washington -- he would show up in your courthouse. what happens when he turns himself in? can you walk me through that process? >> well, for us, our process is slightly different. as you know, we sent teams to both new york and miami, and even the d.c. process is slightly different. so, we will work with our d.a. we will work with our clerk's office to make sure from the perspective to what attorney looks like. and it also is dependent on the judge's preferences. we've been doing a lot of things via zoom. i don't expect that to be the case. but once a decision is made, we'll be able to focus on processes. >> that could have been the case in washington, although we anticipate that will be in person tomorrow. so, then, sheriff, can you tell me -- obviously we looked at the

other situations the former president hasn't had a mugshot taken, handcuffs put on. even though that may have been the situation for any other defendant. what will happen in your jurisdiction? or, have you decided? >> well, i've been very adamant to say we will treat all individuals equally. a lot of that, though, really falls on the shoulders of the presiding judge. so the judge has the ability to really refer or make certain to come along with that. other than that we will treat all individuals the same. >> so basically when it comes to something like a mugshot, if that's what others would get, you would do it, except for if the judge requests otherwise? >> correct. and the judge may bar it. the judge may limit the actual production of it there after. so there are opportunities for the judge to make decisions as well. we certainly will abide by our protocols until we are otherwise

told by presiding judge. >> so as we're looking at the courthouse, we're looking at security barriers. you're here ready any day for possible violence. and you've admitted that there have been dozens of threats made against you. the d.a. fani willis has had threats. over the weekend willis shared a racist message she received in an email. how worried are you about your safety and the safety of your team who will be out there that day? >> again, we take all threats seriously. our focus is to make sure our community at home is safe. when it comes to threats against madam d.a. as well as myself, we've put measures in place. we've gone down this path, and got elected to these jobs to do just that. and so we will focus on that. our safety and security is paramount. but so is the safety and security of the fulton county courthouse. and we've had an opportunity

over the last few months to deal with a few high-profile cases. and we understand what courthouse security looks like. and, quite simply, we are ready. >> all right, sheriff labat, thank you very much, i appreciate your time. >> thank you. i appreciate you. and, next, ukraine has russia on its heels for now. the kremlin is facing attacks on military recruitment centers, a lot of them. and we have new details on what's happening there. also just into "outfront," new details on why president biden for years has refused to acknowledge his seventh grandchild and why he chose to do it now. there he is! it's right there! ♪ oh, he's straight t ahead. he's straight ahead. straight ahead. go go go. ♪ cover more ground in the kia sportage turbo-hybrid.

kia. movement that inspires. you've evolved. you've changed. so have we. renewing microoisture for continuous care. chge is beautiful. i'm saving with liberty mutual, mom. they customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. you could save $700 dollars just by switching. ooooh, let me put a reminder on my phone. on the top of the pile! oh.

only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ here's how tommy lost 30 lbs on noom weight. i'm tom. noom helped him use psychology to lose weight. the mindful aspect made me feel more conscious about what i was eating and why i was eating it. it's actually working. lose weight and make it last with noom weight. hey bud. wow. what's all this? hawaii was too expensive so i brought it here. you know with priceline you could actually take that trip for less than all this. i made a horrible mistake. ♪ go to your happy price ♪ ♪ priceline ♪

♪ thousands of women with metastatic breast cancer, are living in the moment and taking ibrance. ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor is for adults with hr+/her2- metastatic breast cancer as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole significantly delayed disease progression versus letrozole. ibrance may cause low white blood cell counts that may lead to serious infections. ibrance may cause severe inflammation of the lungs. both of these can lead to death. tell your doctor if you have new or worsening chest pain, cough, or trouble breathing. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills,

or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are or plan to become pregnant, or are breastfeeding. for more information about side effects talk to your doctor. be in your moment. ask your doctor about ibrance. we've got new video into "outfront" tonight from the front lines in soledar in eastern ukraine. that's where ukrainian forces are right now trying to break through russian lines. the ukrainians are pinpointing russian positions from the sky using their drones, kamikaze drones which are destroying tanks and camouflaged machine guns. this comes as russia continues to struggle with low troop morale, and that is now on display. here's what a priest from the

orthodox church told russian state television that he is telling forces on the front lines. >> translator: why are we here, and what are we doing? the stuff about patriotism and motherland, those slogans work just fine for teenagers but not for 40 and 50-year-olds with wives and children. they need something more serious. i told them, you came to war not to kill but to die. this is your sacrifice to god. you are giving your life to god. >> fred pleitgen is "outfront." . >> reporter: air defenses lighting up the sky in southern ukraine, as russia launched a wave of drone attacks in the odessa region. the ukrainian military later saying they managed to shoot down 11 of the iranian made

drones. two enemy targets were detected because of their sound and were seen, he says. we opened fire resulting in the destruction of one hit. but ukraine is increasingly fighting back, attacking central moscow with drones twice within three days. a presidential adviser vowing there will be more to come. >> translator: i think moscow will have more and more war on its territory. and this has nothing to do with ukraine alone. now this is due to the historical significance of this moment. if you start such a war, you have to expect that this war will be on your territory. >> reporter: and russia is increasingly on the back foot on the territory it occupies inside ukraine. kyiv saying its forces are making gains both in the south and in the east. eager to shore up support, vladimir putin handing out gold stars to troops who fought in

what the kremlin still calls the, quote, special military operation. >> translator: you came to the front line with a single goal, to be with the fatherland and your people in difficult times. >> reporter: putin has increased fines for those who don't answer draft summons, and russia's parliament recently voted to increase the draft age limit. and now the country is also dealing with a wave of arson attacks on military recruitment offices, though authorities haven't identified a link to the war. they say, in many cases, phone scammers are pressuring vulnerable people to attack the facilities. but speaking to brazilian media, ukraine's president saying he believes there are cracks in putin's armor. he will not be around for another 30 years. he will die, this is completely clear, but i give him ten years tops. but the russian military remains a threat, both on the battlefield and for ukraine's

cities, towns, and key infrastructure, facing attacks both day and night. and erin, another sign that the russians might be feeling the heat, the kremlin is now acknowledging that they are arming civilians in the border areas with ukraine. now, a kremlin spokesman said that that was indeed because of recent cross border attacks, as they put it, originating from the territory of ukraine. of course we know there were some anti-putin russians fighting on the side of ukraine that conducted some cross-border raids in the past. the russians, however, saying that any arming of civilians is strictly in line with russian law. erin? >> fred, thank you very much. and next, why did it take four years for president biden to acknowledge his seventh grandchild? why is he speaking out about her now? new details just in to "out front."

they're off from school, but not really home. images and videos. social media, fine-tuned to suck them in. and steal them away. alone you can't stop it. together we will. we have a plan. join us. ( ♪ )

my a1c was up here; now, it's down with rybelsus®. his a1c? it's down with rybelsus®. my doctor told me rybelsus® lowered a1c better than a leading branded pill and that people taking rybelsus® lost more weight. i got to my a1c goal and lost some weight too. rybelsus® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. need to get your a1c down? you may pay as little as $10 per prescription. hon?

woo-hoo. you've gotta see this. the weathertech's here. (wow, that was fast.) [helicopter hovering] weathertech is the ultimate protection for your vehicle. laser-measured floorliners, no drill mudflaps, cargoliner, bumpstep, seat protector and cupfone. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ weathertech. hi, i'm jason. i've lost 228 pounds on golo. so when my doctor told me i needed weight loss surgery, i knew i had to make a change. golo's helped me transition to a healthier, sustainable lifestyle. i'm so surprised just how crazy my metabolism has fired up. i have a trust in golo 'cause i know it works. golo isn't like every other program out there, and i'm living proof of it. (announcer) change your life at golo.com. that's golo.com. ♪ (don't cha by callaway/ray plays) ♪

( ♪ ♪ ) don't cha wish your phone was fun like this? ( ♪ ♪ ) don't cha wish your phone looked more like this? don't cha wish your phone could flex like this? ( ♪ ♪ ) don't cha wish your phone could fit in here? don't cha? ( ♪ ♪ ) pre-order now and get a free storage upgrade. tonight, new details behind president biden's decision to publicly acknowledge his seventh grandchild. >> i have seven grandkids, four of them -- five of them -- old enough to talk on the phone. you know, every day i either text them or call them. >> up until last week, the president and first lady

publicly spoke about six grandchildren, a tally that excluded navy, a 4-year-old girl in arkansas proven in a 2019 paternity test to be hunter biden's daughter. sources tell cnn president biden's silence until now was he was following hunter's guidance to remain quiet as a complicated legal fight unfolded. everyone has been watching this unfold for days. but it's been three years since the paternity test proved that hunter biden is navy's father. yet it is only now that the president and first lady are publicly acknowledging they have a seventh grandchild. what more are you learning about the decision to acknowledge navy as part of their family. >> erin, we know the president and first lady were taking their queues directly from hunter biden himself, who requested they not acknowledge the little girl, as he sought to lower his child support payments.

referring to six, not seven grandkids. and sources familiar with those discussions tell me that even if the bidens had wanted to acknowledge navy roberts earlier, they felt that doing so would throw hunter and family sensitivities under the bus. so, they made it clear to their advisers that they were fiercely loyal to hunter and that that outweighed any political consideration. but that position, of course, became untenable in recent weeks as opposition from the republican field became louder and louder. there were scathing op-eds about this point. once that legal case got resolved, with hunter's blessing, they made that change. >> what's interesting is joe biden talks often about his closeness with his family. navy roberts is a different situation. she doesn't have biden as a last name. she lives in arkansas with her mother. what does all of this mean for the bidens' relationship with this little girl going forward? >> erin, that all remains to be seen. there's been a suggestion that the president and the first lady

would like to have a relationship, that they would like to meet her. but whether and when that visit actually happens, we don't know. and the other question is how the campaign decides to depict the grandkids going forward because they've always figured very prominently in depictions of the biden family. we should note that attorneys for both hunter biden and london roberts, navy's mother, did not respond to our questions. and the white house declined to comment, saying that this is still a family and personal matter and will remain that way. >> it's certainly going to remain a charged issue no matter how you look at it or how it's resolved. kayla, thank you very much. thanks so much to all of you for joining us tonight. "ac 360" begins right now. tonight on "360" the former president chooses to be arraigned in person in washington as the government's defense takes shape. we'll look ahead with john