well, good evening, everyone. i'm laura coates. tonight a really bad day in court for donald trump. yes, he is the clear front-runner in the race for the white house. he is neck and neck with joe biden, according to polling, but now a new york judge says the candidate and his adult sons are also now liable for fraud, saying if they gave false financial statements for years, committing fraud over and over again by inflating the value of their assets. now news flash, this is the man who could be running the country if the election of course goes his way. and on top of, as you know, four criminal indictments as well. and just when you thought the circus on the hill could not get any wilder, well, you have matt

gaetz again this time issuing new threats to mccarthy's speakership. the senators working together to have a backup plan. and mccarthy saying there is a plan, but they won't vote on it until friday. the government shutdown happens at 11:59 p.m. this saturday if they're unable to avert it. and there is a heartbreaking story that is near and dear to my heart. a young black girl ignored as all of the white girls around her were given medals at a competition in ireland. what if it were your daughter, or mine, who is now a gymnast. even simone biles says that it broke her heart. i want to begin now with major legal trouble for the former president tonight, this time in the new york attorney general tonight, this time in the new york attorney general's civil case against donald trump and his family business. a judge finding that trump and his adult sons are liable for fraud.

also, canceling the business certifications of the trump organization. that move alone deals a major blow to the former president and of course his businesses. here to discuss norm eisen and former white house account council may mehlman. glad to have both of you here. i want to begin with you, norm. this is so significant. this was a summary judgment motion. taking a step back. tell us what that means and why it's significant? >> laura, when you do a civil case, there are various offramps that can benefit the plaintiff, whoever is bringing the civil case, or the defendant, whoever is being sued. in this case, you have the state of new york represented by the very tough attorney general tish james. the state of new york is the plaintiff. donald trump, and a variety of his family members and the

businesses are the defendant. the allegation very similar to the allegations that we've seen from special counsel jack smith, or from d.a. fani willis in georgia. not election fraud, alleged. here the allegation was business fraud that trump over and over again, he said his apartment was three times as large as it was to get loans and insurance. his residents seven springs, his mar-a-lago estate allegedly exaggerated. >> all overinflating assets? >> that is the allegation. and both the attorney general and donald trump tried for summary judgment before the judge in new york, and the judge granted summary judgment to the attorney general and said there is no question donald trump inflated these properties. there is nothing -- what it means, there is nothing for us to argue about at trial. this is settled. also, denied donald trump's

effort to get summary judgment. so we're going to have a number of other charges that will be tried, and various damages, disgorgement, how much money trump has to give up that is going to be tried as well. >> so important, may. we think about the summary judgment. essentially a judge saying listen, you only have to go before a fact finder, the jury. if there is some factual dispute, in this case he said the facts were so strong, there was no need to go to a jury on these specific assets of it. but i can't help but wonder how this is going to play politically, because, of course, it was led by tish james who was criticized by the trump family specifically on having campaigned to bring them down. how you see it? >> i almost feel bad for the new york attorney general because she did want to make a name for herself for being the aggressive trump prosecutor only to be outshone by like a local fulton county d.a.

so this was going to be her moment. and maybe not. politically, it's tough to say, because we're dealing with trump. so you really never know. also, summary judgment motions are appealable. and i expect that to be appealed. i think in trump world, the thing that people are going to take away, is that this judge was so trump unfriendly, it was really hard for him to mask. the opinion, he fined the lawyers for bringing legal arguments say i've already considered these legal arguments. yeah you did. at a motion to dismiss stage, they are different under a different standard of review. so just the anger and the animosity i think really shines through this opinion. and i think that is going to speak a lot to trump world and sort of get trump witch hunt aspect that he really likes to play up. >> and he does play that up, norm. but of course judges are not always known to be the most pleasant when they have had to resolve an issue more than once.

this is a playbook that says the judiciary is the person who comes out on the losing side. to may's point, this is appealable, and there are issues they can in fact appeal. what do you see with regard to these elements? >> the arguments about the sanctions on the lawyers are not going to succeed on appeal, because these lawyers were repeatedly arguing that you can describe an 11,000-square-foot apartment as a 30,000-square-foot apartment as if they said, well, a square footage is not objective. if there is anything objective in the world, laura, you got a ruler, okay? that is the definition of objective. it's the same way with the crazy valuations they were pushing. seven springs. the maximum valuation, usually 30 million. one year 56 million.

they argued that it was legit to have a $292 million valuation. that is a 400% increase. so these kinds of arguments the judge warned him, he told them he was going to come after them. i think they're lucky the sanctions were light, a little over $7,000 per lawyer. in some of the other trump cases the sanctions against trump's lawyers have been much greater. in terms of appeal, the judge applied the quasi corporate death penalty here. he is yanking those certificates that you need to do business in new york. >> so it's done? they cannot operate at all? >> if there is no stay pending appeal. and if it with stands. it's not as simple as that. he says we're going to point a receiver. like a chapter seven bankruptcy. somebody is going to be put in charge of these businesses and figure out how to liquidate them. they're going to sell the

properties. they're going to collect the rents. they're going to manage the businesses. so it was a very, very broad decertification, taking the certifications away. not just the companies at issue here, but any other entity controlled by donald j. trump and the family members lose their certificate of doing business, i think that will withstand appeal, but that's going to be an attack. >> may, to that point, when people first learned about this or most people know donald trump, it really is the brand before it is the president of the united states and before it is who he is now, seeking reelection. you were in the white house's council. he has been taking to truth social. and he is responding to what he sees. and one post saying, quote, they didn't even at my most valuable. they didn't even include my

houston valuable asset, my brand. but did that really come into play in the fraud being discussed here? >> so i think it should. i think a couple of things. i think the lawyers were trying to make a couple of arguments. it was not saying 3,000 means 3,000. their arguments were, one, the new york attorney general has power on behalf of this state, and here the state was not defrauded. in fact, there weren't really parties defrauded. the banks weren't defrauded. they set the interest rates. they made money. and two was the value of the assets a couple of things there was a disclaimer saying this is what i'm saying. you the bank do your homework. you value them however you want. but also, yes. i am a very famous person, and people would like to buy my properties. they value my properties. they trust my brand. and is true. that is something that happens

in business, maybe to the extent that trump said? probably not. but that sort of inflation is not foreign to the corporate real estate world. >> yet the judge on that point about the displamer, the judge was very, very not impressed at all with the idea of having a disclaimer suggest hey, don't take my word for it, do your own homework. the judge's mind something that was worthless as a way to include in the valuation of things, think about the brand politically, norm. as may is alluded to, when you're talking about the brand, his campaign was about being a successful, savvy -- of course he has walked away from it now. he said he wasn't a resident of new york any longer. that's impacting how we might want to present himselves. tell us why it's only the sons

here. >> that is because at that relevant time period, the case was worried for statute of limitations agreements and reasons. there is a tolling agreement that affects the time period. the court found on appeal that in the relevant time period, ivanka was not yet an officer of the companies. she was not responsible at that time. i think in terms of trump's brand, that is not an excuse for some of these arguments that were made. his brand is besides the point here. you are not to raise questions about the so-called worthless klaus, the disclaimers that were included in these financial statements. i have it here. you can read it up and down. it doesn't say i will lie to you. i will double or triple the value of these. my statements in here are outright lies. and the judge says that the

no worthless clause is just that, wtoless to donald trump. and it didn't hurt the lenders or insurance companies. that's not the way the law works. you know in well. you were a prosecutor here in d.c. if i shoot at somebody and i happen to miss, you still get prosecuted even though you missed. it's dangerous to lie. and the judge makes that point. new york law doesn't care about the loss or the gain in the end. what they care about is people who do business in new york have to be truthful. they can't have a persistent. they can't have a persistent pattern of major frauds. and that is what the judge found today in ruling for d.a., for the a.g. in new york. >> real quick, may, there is -- there is supposed to be a civil trial beginning on monday, of course. this is all done at this point now?

or there is more to come? >> well, so they don't even know whether the trial is actually going the start on monday. it still could get pushed back. and then like i said, i think you're going to see appeal after appeal. but, yeah, and it's a little bit unclear what the effect is of pulling his business certificates. does he have to cease doing business? what happens next? so there are a lot of unanswered questions right now. but i do think your lead is correct in that it was not a good day for donald trump. >> well, thank you, may. my leads are always correct. thank you so much for join us tonight. norm eisen, may mailman, nice to see you both. tonight, everyone, more than a third of democrats in the u.s. senate are calling on -- look at this. they're calling on senator menendez to resign. remember yesterday? this list was not even a full column. now look at it. of course the floodgates open

when senator corey booker, the junior senator stepped in. they're calling on him to resign now. menendez and his wife neighborhood den are expected to appear in court in the morning for the bribery charges. and of course he is presumed innocent unless proven guilty. cnn's chief law enforcement and intelligence analyst says john miller says this case raises questions for u.s. intelligence. and john miller joins me now. john, i'm glad you're with me tonight. we've been talking a lot about the gold bars and the amount of money that was found, and all of the allegations contained in this indictment. but there is a big elephant in the room that is not really being addressed. i know you've had a lot to say about this. it all centers around a new jersey-born egyptian businessman. and the question you have is did the egyptian government, the government itself target an influential u.s. senator to be a kind of mark?

connect these dots. >> it's interesting. you can't find the connects for the indictment. you've got wael wael hanna, br together egyptian military officer, government officials, and getting deals done to unfreeze aid to egypt that had been put on hold by the state department and release weapons that was destined to be delivered that was also on hold. so he is doing these things in the interest of the egyptian government, as is alleged in the indictment. he is innocent until proven guilty. but then one has to ask why is he just somebody that is just doing this out of the goodness of his heart? is it because he got a monopoly to be the clearer for halal beef

being shipped to that country at a great profit? or is it something more? the question on the table, l laura, is it possible that they could have actually been using the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee as an egyptian asset in return for bribe money being funneled by a businessman without the egyptian intelligence services who attended some of these meetings, not knowing about it? it sounds unlikely. >> answer that question for us, though. the idea, i know it's rhetorical in part, but you're intimating something pretty significant about the unlikelihood that the egyptian government would have no idea this was happening, as well as the fact it really does put a huge spotlight on senator menendez as particularly susceptible and amenable to this. >> well, if you think about it, and i'm speaking as someone who worked in the fbi who was familiar with counterintelligence operations, as someone who worked in the

director of national intelligence, and nypd's intelligence bureau, what you're looking for as an intelligence officer is what asset, what source can you recruit? how can you compromise that person. do they have propensity towards corruption? can you fulfill a need or exploit a weakness? and where you have a u.s. senator who has received a lot of publicity for being charged in a corruption case, it was a hung jury. the rest of the charges were dropped. he surfaced in another investigation before that one. it does introduce the kind of vulnerabilities that could be attractive to a foreign intelligence service, especially if they have a way in. consider this, laura. wael hana, the new jersey businessman was friends for years with nadine before she suddenly started dating senator menz, then became his wife. and during that period of years, 2018, 2019, all the way up through recent times, according to the indictment, she was the

middle person, the broker who put together the meetings between the businessmen and the egyptian officials. so that's a lot of coincidences. one other thing, there is a case involving a businessman, vice president of a bank. name is pierre gerges, charged last year, an egyptian american who was allegedly trying to infiltrate u.s. law enforcement including nypd officers to get information on egyptian dissidents on u.s. soil. he was charged with being an unregistered agent of the egyptian government. and something very interesting buried in those court papers was an assertion that there are nine egyptian operatives aimed at cultivating unwitting assets and recruiting them to carry out the interests of the egyptian government. so it's interesting that someone who was trying to recruit law

enforcement to get confidential information is charged as an agent of the government, and an individual who was allegedly funneling half a million dollars gold and convertibles to a united states senator is being described in the case that so far is only bribery, and on the senator's part, bribery and extortion. so there is more to this story that may come out in court, or may not, depending on how this goes. >> well, it's so important to think about all those different iterations and an assessment of the key players and the co-defendants now. you and i both know you got a co-defendant case, suddenly you start to see cracks that otherwise you would not expect to be there. so if there are those coincidences, if the jury eventually, if they ever see this case in the trial are trying to look and connect those dots, it's going to be a lot of head scratching, and the prosecution has their work cut out for them.

of course unless they have somebody willing to flip. john miller? >> john miller, nice to see you, everyone thank you so much. listen, when we come back, can anything stop the runaway train that is hurtling towards a government shutdown at 11:59 p.m. on saturday, otherwise known as a minute from midnight? well, michigan democrat debbie dingell is going to weigh in next.

well, tonight, speaker kevin mccarthy said the house will consider a conservative stopgap bill with border provisions likely on friday, regardless whether leadership is confident the votes are there to pass it, and actually daring hard-liners to vote against it. well, the hard-liners are not budging. here is congressman matt gaetz once again threatening to oust speaker mccarthy. >> the one thing i agree with my democrat colleagues on, is for the last eight months, this

house has been poorly led. and we own that, and we have to do something about it. and you know what? my democrat colleagues will have an opportunity to do something than too. and we will see if they bail out our failed speaker. >> let's talk about it now with democratic congresswoman debbie dingell. thank you so much for joining us this evening. if this were to happen, what is the plan for the democrats? do you intend to bail out as congressman matt gaetz says speaker mccarthy? >> i think we're not going get caught in the midst of republican caucus politics. what we are focused on right now is trying to keep the government from shutting. i wish that we could get a simple continue. i wish that we could get a simple continuing resolution. we've heard that the senate has bipartisan bill that they will likely pass by sunday. which is two days too late, by

the way. but i hope that before the congress or the government reopens for business op monday, we will pass a continuing resolution. because i do not believe that we should. >> you know, it has been possessed as you've seen it time and time again, either speaker mccarthy keeps his job, or the government stays open. this kind of either or is very difficult for the american electorate, obviously, to reconcile. and as you know, reconcile, and as you know, the senate reached a bipartisan deal to head off a shutdown through mid-november. is there a reason that can't happen in the house? is it because of the ukraine funding? >> it could happen in the house if speaker mccarthy decided that it should happen in the house. and that's what we're going to have to see this week. i understand why the american people are having a hard time understanding.

i shouldn't be either keflezighi stays the speaker or we keep funding the government. even members of the republican caucus, let's just bring it to a head this week. it's not the right way to be running our government. we are irresponsible. if we let the government shut down we are endangering national security. we are endangering or skies. we are endangering or seniors. we are endangering our children. i guess i wish we could get proengss bills passed. we haven't gotten any passed this year. democrats aren't in sure. republicans are. but i wish we could work together to keep the government rung. so what is the solution? how do you do it? >> well, the senate is offering a bipartisan bill that they believe -- well, they had 75 votes of cloture. if it came over here and the form that it is in right now, i think you would get enough votes between both caucuses to pass this and keep the government

running until november 17th. >> so i want to talk, if we can, about something else that has come to a bit of a stand still, as you know. the united autoworkers strike is happening. it's in the second week. president biden actually came to your state today and joined the striking workers on the picket line. you have said in the past he should not intervene with these strikes. but you are happy that he joined the workers out there. i'm wondering if his presence puts a huge presidential thumb on the scale of negotiations and puts him smack-dab in the center of them. >> i've been very clear that i do not believe the president or any policymaker has a negotiating table. i do not believe he should intervene. the president has been strong that he is standing with the workers on this, but he's also said that the negotiations need to happen between the workers and the companies, but has talked about the workers' needs being real. companies were in trouble in 2008 and 2009, and almost went

bankrupt. the employees gave up their cost of living adjustment because they didn't want to see their companies destroyed. now in real terms, they've not had the cola restored, they are making 10% less than they were in real terms in 2008 and 2009. that's why these workers are at the table. i think it's between the companies and the workers at the table to work this out. and as policymakers, we need to understand what the issues are, be supportive. but i do not believe we should be intervening. >> well, was his presence interference or just a demonstration of support? >> he had talked to -- i know for a fact that the president has been talking to people on all sides. he has been encouraging them to stay at the table. and i think he was showing that it was standing with the workers and the issues that are years raising. but he did even with the workers today reinforce it will happen at the negotiating table. >> congresswoman, you're actually a former general

motors -- congresswoman, you're actually a former joins executive, and you have said that they are -- these are not typical negotiations. can you share some insight into how the companies might be thinking about a strike like this? >> look, i am a card girl, and have i been on all sides. i think these are in my lifetime i've seen many contract negotiations. i think these are the most important i'm going to witness in my lifetime, because we're talking about the future of the domestic auto industry in this country. and this is where the rubber is going to hit the road. we cannot ignore the global climate is real and that we have to do something about it. but as we face the future of technology and electric vehicle, we have to make sure that we're not leaving the worker behind. so we have to talk what is this transition? how do we make sure we're building those cars here in the united states of america by american autoworkers? and that is very critical to me. i'm not going to cede our

leadership to any country when another former president says if we build electric vehicles, we're going build them 100% in china. we're not. we're going build them here. and we all need to understand what it's going to take to make that transition and keep a strong vital auto industry in this country. and the country is very quickly being reminded that the auto industry is still the backbone of the american economy. the results of the strike are already being felt by many. >> and will continue to resonate just the impact of what's happened already. the historic nature, the demands. as you mentioned, the cost of living, post the bailouts and post pandemic as well. congresswoman debbie dingell, thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you. a line of children given awards at a gymnastics event, except one of them, the only black girl. we'll talk about that next.

is it possible my network could take my business to the next level? it is with comcast business. powering all your devices with gig-speed wifi. and you get fast downloads and uploads. pick it up! pick it up! oh we got this! because it's powered by the next generation 10g network. more speed for your business? it's not just possible. it's happening. get started for $59.99 a month for 12 months.

plus, ask how to get an $800 prepaid card with a qualifying internet bundle. comcast business, powering possibilities. now imagine that you're a young girl. you just competed in a gymnastics event, and you're standing in line with all the other gymnasts waiting for the

medal you earned. but you're the only one who doesn't actually get that medal. and you're not sure you have been skipped over. it's exactly what happened to one young girl, and it was all caught on camera. there is newly resurfaced video now viewed over 50 million times from a meet that happened a year and a half ago. and it shows an official who is handing out medals, getting to the only black girl standing in line. she pauses, appears to skip over her, and continues passing out medals to everyone else. now, a parent complained about alleged racist behavior, and a resolution was somehow reached. but now that the world has seen the video, gymnastics ireland has now been forced to comment, telling cnn what happened on the day should not have happened, and for that, we are deeply sorry. joining me now to discuss, fisk

university gymnastics coach carin tarver. she was the first black gymnast to win an ncaa all around title in 1989. carin, a pleasure to see you. i have a little girl, she is 9 years old. she is now on a gymnastics team. so watching through the lens of a parent now, i have a whole different view of the entire gymnastics community and the work that you guys do. let me tell you, when i saw this, the mama bear came out through my computer screen on behalf of this young child. what was your reaction when this resurfaced video came out? >> you know, honestly, i was very disheartened. i mean, it's been a long time that we've been around in this sport. so to see something like that, to see that, to see that in 2023 or 2022, it's still happening. it's very frustrating.

we made a lot of strides. >> excuse me. i didn't want to cut you off. i wonder if there is an explanation of some sorts. as you mentioned, people know simone biles, the dominique dawes, the gabby douglas, the of course carin tarver, yourself. and thinking about all the different things you've been able to accomplish. and yet there is still not this complete dismissal of the role of race in this sport. >> no, definitely not. it's inherent unfortunately in the sport, and it's something that has to be looked at carefully. it's something that officials need to look at. it's something that usa gymnastics lead to look, something that coaches need to look at. because they don't always recognize when they say things to little girls or do things like you just saw in the video, that have such a huge impact on these young girls' lives. >> did you experience something similar to this, or at least in your early journey as a gymnast, did you feel like you were the

only one? >> i was the only one on my team for a while there. and, you know what's sad? if you talk to most of the girls on my team. that will tell you that they were the only ones in their gym, as well. they were the only ones on the team. yes, i experienced that. i would go to competitions, and there would be a couple of black girls in the whole entire competition, maybe two, maybe three. it was difficult because you didn't have those role models, anyone that looked like you. >> well, you know simone biles, one of the ultimate role models of course says the parents of this little girl actually reached out to her, and that she was heartbroken and sent a video of the little girls saying there is no room for racism in any sport or at all. biles is obviously a huge star. has completely transformed many's view of what gymnastics can be, and the trajectory continues. but that must have meant everything to this little girl,

seeing a role model like her. what has it meant to even your players to see a young girl treated this way who looks like them? >> you know, for some of them, it may remind them of something that happened to them. maybe not quite as blatant and obvious. but still, the way they felt when they were at a competition, and maybe the other little girls who were in their squad treated them or looked at them. or the way parents when they're talking and they think no one can hear, that they had to deal with this stuff. and they had to deal with it their entire gymnastics career. >> so selfishly, carin, i'm going to be on the sidelines of matches. i'm going try to suppress the feeling that every mother has, which is you just want people to treat your children well. but you're prepared if someone does not. tell me what kind of advice do you have for me as a mom, thinking about this? >> well, i would say you're just

going to have to be there for your child. because sometimes they don't understand they didn't score better than they did, especially when they do seem to reflect that. and there are times when we have to look at that. and as a coach, i'll look at that and say there is no way. i mean, and i talk to other judges sometimes. oh, well, her feet weren't pointed. her legs with sore bad, things of that nature. no, they weren't. you just -- you have the thought process or in your head you saw something. but they really -- it wasn't that bad. >> we'll have the all watch out. and of course what happened with this little girl, just thinking about it. now to have it viewed 50 million times. i hope that sees those views as support for her and not indication of people trying to watch a moment of pain. carin tarver, thank you so much. >> thank you for inviting me. well, the supreme court

telling alabama republicans no for the second time in months. and that decision will have very big implications for black voters who were there, and possibly anyone else who might have gerrymandering on the brain.

we meant it the first time. that's the message the supreme court is sending alabama lawmakers today in yet another 5-4 decision rejecting now their second attempt at a congressional map that fails to add another majority black district. now in a june decision, scotus

ordered the state to provide more representation for black residents. alabama's population is more than a quarter black, but only one of the state's seven congressional districts is black. the supreme court decision could have huge impacts for states and democrats hope a retaking of the house. joining me now is alabama's only democratic member representative terry sewell. thank you so much for joining us today. this is quite extraordinary, because the alabama republicans who drew these maps have now been rebuffed by the supreme court twice in a span of months on this issue. why did they not understand the first time? >> well, first of all, thank you so much for allowing me to be on the show today. when i went to law school, when the supreme court said you won, you won. so defying the supreme court was

not a great idea. but despite the efforts by state officials in my state to obstruct, to delay, to defy, the supreme court was unanimous in its decision to stop them from trying to reinstate those old maps. and i am just thrilled. i think the real winners here is the state of alabama, all of the voters because it's about fair representation. 27% of the black voting age population in my state are african american. there are seven seats. only one seat allows us to choose a candidate of our choice. and that's simply only 14% reputation. so this is really about diluting the strength of a black vote in alabama. i'm just thrilled that today we are celebrating that alabama can't go backwards. we're going forward, and we're going forward with fair congressional maps. >> it clears the way, congresswoman, for maps proposed

just this week by a court appointed special master that would create a sect district with 53% black representation. you're the only black representative for alabama. what are voting telling you about this potential change? >> they're so excited. you know, i think this is really about political power and the struggle for political power. and power and struggle doesn't come without a fight. i am proud of the plaintiffs for sticking this out. this is really about fairness. fairness in reputation. there is tip is code has an equal opportunity to vote in this democracy. it's critical. it's fundamental. >> people might look at this and say well, adding another majority black district guarantees something for democrats. but you're point is that you have to have the opportunity to elect a candidate of your choosing. it does not guarantee the result

that will actually follow, but that you have the opportunity. that would be fairness. but you also have razor thin majorities in the house that could determine control of the next congress if you add an additional seat. this is quite significant. >> it's very significant. because not only does alabama, we were the first at the gate, but a case in louisiana is next, and then comes georgia. and frankly, i can see lawsuits and mississippi and south carolina as well. all of these states only have one majority/minority district, one representative in congress as a democrat. and yet these are six seats in mississippi, four or five seats in south carolina. so this is really not just about congressional maps, it also has consequences for our county commission and our state legislative maps. to the extent maps are drawn, and they don't fairly draw black

voters in that they pack voters and try to make sure that we're not -- our full voting strength is not there, that those maps will be thrown out. so this is a real warning to state legislatures across the country that the voting rights act is alive and well. i'm really proud of the fact that last week we introduced the jean-robert lewis voting rights advancement opt it. as we talked about earlier, section 2 is just one part. but only congress can get back a section 4 by coming up with a modern day framework for determining which states are discriminating against minute in order voters. so we want the full protection. john lewis would expect nothing else. i'm looking forward to getting into good trouble, necessary trouble in order to get the sections. >> everyone is looking at one that congress could act on.

so important to hear your perspective. so phan important for people to realize democracy in the voting and in the accounting. and it sounds like gerrymanderers beware. congressman seoul, thank you so much. we'll be right back.

well, the powerball jackpot, everyone, it soared to an estimated $835 million after no lucky winners nabbed the grand prize during last night's drawing, which means there is still hope for you, because the next drawing is tomorrow. but that of course got me to thinking about the amount of money we're talking about. and of course $835 million is a

lot of money. so we asked our harry enten how that amount would stack up against some other big numbers. like how about if we use the jackpot to pay united auto workers who were striking? well, if the 400,000 workers in the union got the raise they want to $38 an hour, you couldn't quite pay them all for a week, but it does something. and with the looming deadline to keep the government open, you could find the department of education for a bit more than a day with that amount. and how does that $835 million tack up against the mighty taylor swift? she has made about $2.2 billion in north american ticket sales alone. the powerball jackpot is a little more than a third of that. sorry to make you do math this evening, but that's a lot of money we're talking about. thank you all for watching. our coverage continues.