will see. madison and 56th is where our shot is up, so we are looking back at the traffic that is stopped along madison avenue. police have closed the sidewalks as they prepare for a former president to do what no other has done, go face an indictment on criminal charges and it will happen in lower manhattan, and we are covering every moment here on fox. "america reports" now. >> john: harris, thank you. fox news alert to start us off as we watch unfold an event unprecedented in this nation. first time in american history, a former president will be arraigned on criminal charges. any moment now, former president trump will leave his new york city residence at trump tower you see on the left side of the screen there and surrender to authorities at a manhattan courthouse the scene outside of which really is extraordinary with trump supporters, trump protestors, and assembled hoard

of media and as well, new york's finest all there protecting everyone who is out front of that courthouse. we'll put that up for you in a second. hello from washington. i'm john roberts. good afternoon to you. >> gillian: gillian turner in for sandra smith. this is "america reports." multiple sources tell fox news trump faces more than 30 charges and at least one of them is a felony. trump is expected to plead nothing on all the charges, they stem from an alleged hush money payment made just weeks before he was elected president in 2016. >> john: the former president will be booked and fingerprinted, he will not be handcuffed and still unclear whether there will be a mug shot taken. 2:15 eastern time, donald trump will formally face charges in court. it's still unclear when the actual indictment itself will be unsealed, but it's all happening out of the immediate view of the public after the judge denied a request to allow cameras to

cover the proceedings live. >> gillian: we are learning trump wants to talk to the media in the hallway outside the courtroom either before or after the arraignment, possibly both. he's also planning to make public remarks tonight when he returns to his home in mar-a-lago. the manhattan district attorney alvin bragg will hold a news conference in the 3:00 p.m. hour, unless a gag order is issued during the arraignment which would prevent him from doing that. >> john: as we await the president's departure in that picture there that you see on your screen, the back entrance to trump tower, madison and 56th area as harris falkner was saying a moment ago, we begin with fox team coverage. bryan is standing by outside the new york state courthouse at 100 center street. but first eric is live outside trump tower in midtown manhattan. eric. >> hello, john.

we expect the former president's motorcade to move momentarily, any moment now, to go from 56th street and make a left up madison avenue before he heads down presumably the f.d.r. drive to the manhattan criminal court building, the state supreme court building where the arraignment will take place. the former president arraigned and arrested when he shows up in court. he will not be handcuffed. instead, fingerprinted, all the court business at the court today on hold for this historic occasion. meanwhile, let me show you the scene here outside trump tower which is right behind me. it is a mad house, as you can see. this is really become the newest tourist attraction in new york. not only have hundreds of media lined up along 5th avenue at trump tower, but tourists and visitors and new yorkers crowding to try and get a look of the former president when he leaves, taking videos and photos as well as looking at the media

ourselves at the same time. alvin bragg, the district attorney, has said that he covers the law and prosecutes the law fairly and accurately. reportedly has brought 117 of these falsifying of business records cases so far since he's been in office in the last year and a half. pushing back against those who call this a political persecution. we will know a lot more when those exact charges are unsealed. $130,000 payments allegedly to stormy daniels, that is flowed through the account of michael cohen that supposedly the testimony in the case that mr. bragg will bring. quite controversial. many wondering if they could ever get a conviction on this. meanwhile, there are both sides showing up, i'll show you a tape now we shot earlier, you have pro and anti-trump people who have been out here on 5th avenue on the streets with cowbells and whistles and chanting, photo of

the president with bars as if he were in jail from one protestor and even a gentleman who was spinning basketballs while he was exclaiming trump not guilty. it's not a contentious mood here, but festive for many, the trump supporters here are showing their support for the former president in a more quieter way. so we are waiting for the president's motorcade to move out from trump tower. he, of course, famously built this building, iconic glass structure that is his namesake back in 1980. best and company department store and that launched donald trump on his way to become a billionaire real estate developer here in new york, launched with "the apprentice" nationwide, a nationally known name and eventually to the white house and now the history books as the first former president of the united states arrested soon

to be charged we are told with those several dozen counts of falsifying business records. we'll see if one is a felony as mr. bragg tries to tie this in to the campaign, trying to seek stormy daniels' silence in exchange for that $130,000. we are outside trump tower waiting for the motorcade to leave, we'll of course bring that to you. you can hear behind me some of the raucous people here in front of trump tower. >> john: eric shawn in midtown manhattan, thank you. >> gillian: hi, bryan, in lower manhattan outside the courthouse. >> we'll stay with the live shot outside of trump tower where eric shawn was reporting on as we await the former president to exit the building and make his way down, about four miles down presumably the f.d.r. to here the courthouse at 100 center

street. when he gets here, greeted by a choreographed scene. two dozen new york state court officer lined up outside the court. center street outside the courthouse as well as lafayette street nearby the courthouse had been shut down and over just the last i would say 30 minutes. there was a ton of media here as well as journalists actually waiting in line to get inside the courtroom to be able to tell all of us what they will see inside. this is what we expect. when the former president gets here, processed on the seventh floor of this building, where he will surrender to the d.a.s office. at that point, escorted after being processed, we expect it to being fingerprinting and not a mug shot and no handcuffs, brought to the 15th floor, arraignment in the courtroom. the judge has decided that there will not be live cameras inside the courtroom but there will be

cameras in the hallways, which should be able to capture the president, the former president walking in and out of the courtroom, and we are told by a federal official that the former president would like to make some remarks going in or out or perhaps even both, we don't expect a gaggle of some sorts or a press conference, but some remarks, nonetheless, as there appears to be some movement there at the building as we keep an eye on that. and so when that happens there will be still photographers allowed inside the courtroom to take some photos and the journalists inside will be able to write down everything they see and once the arraignment is over, the charges are read a loud and he is given the indictment and a schedule discussed about perhaps motions to be discussed, maybe even moving the menu, moving the venue of this case. then it will be adjourned, we expect all of this to take 15 to 30 minutes. the former president, once he gets to this courthouse, we

expect him to enter through, and i think that was just him. john, gillian, did you see the former president walk out or is that just me? >> you know what, it looked like him who just walked out, although the lack of activity there, he has departed apparently, yeah, now we see the secret service moving toward the vehicles. about a 4-mile drive to get there from trump tower down to 100 center street. we understand that as they did back when donald trump was president, they will be blocking off the streets to give him a very quick ride down toward the courthouse, otherwise it could take him as much as 25 or 30 minutes in manhattan traffic. so bryan, you will see him down there very soon, and gillian, as we look at the pictures here, the corner, and we are right about 56th street and madison, a side entrance and there goes one of the suvs there pulling out from 56th street, a side

entrance to trump tower, some loading docks there and entrance to mail room and side entrance to the upper floors. that's where he's departing from. i remember hanging out in front of trump towers so much during the 2016 election campaign and always saw him enter and leave through that particular entrance, and now as they slowly wind down towards the courthouse here, we have to keep in mind, gillian, we are watching something happen for the very first time in america's history. >> gillian: it is, when he's arraigned today, first time in history a former president faces criminal charges in court, in manhattan today, very big implications not just for the former president and his team and his campaign going forward, but for every future president who serves at 1600 pennsylvania avenue. the president's defenders today, john, as you know insist this is all political persecution

masquerading as law. trump's critics say today is not only historic because he is the first former president to be indicted but because he is the first former president to behave -- to have behaved criminally in terms of hush money payment to stormy daniels while he was on the campaign trail. we have to remember though this is all a long time ago, six years plus now, it all happened very close to election night, just a couple of weeks, really, before donald trump was elected to be commander in chief. >> john: alleged to have behaved criminally, unlike nancy pelosi who suggested that former president will have to prove his innocence in court, it will be incumbent upon the district attorney there in manhattan to prove his guilt in court. in this country we are all presumed innocent until proven guilty. martha maccallum, and jonathan turley, also andy mccarthy, and

trey, host of "sunday night in america." so, as we watched yesterday former president travelling from laguardia airport down to trump tower, we are going to watch his motorcade process down madison avenue toward the courthouse, a little bit of a radio show, folks, apologies for that. but martha, your thoughts as the first time in this nation's history we see a president going to the courthouse to be arraigned on criminal charges. >> martha: i can't help but think, john, as you were just saying, covered the first four years of the trump presidency and the election that led up to it, trump tower was the center of so much activity. i remember the night that the former president secured the nomination having basically received enough delegates to get that nomination. he came out downstairs in the lobby and spoke, the beginning of an era that i think began something the likes of which we have not seen, and you have a lot of trump supporters and of

course across the nation who look at this and think that they have really been after this former president since then. that for the sin of winning his election in 2016, he has paid the price with a barrage of incoming that has not stopped until this moment. and you know, that is clearly what trump supporters will tell you and why you see some people turning out downtown today to cheer him on, whether or not those numbers are what they used to be, we don't know. we know that since this information came forward, that he was going to be indicted, we have seen an increase in the polls, increase in fundraising as well, so whether or not this is a momentary blip of enthusiasm surrounding the president we'll see what happens. it seems this is the weakest of the charges that he faces and there's a lot of question about why this d.a. decided to go ahead and twist this case from a misdemeanor to a felony when he has spent his entire tenure going in the opposite direction with other cases, many of which

people in new york feel makes them less safe. >> gillian: martha, i want to stick with you for a second if i may and turn your attention to politics. this is gillian. the trump campaign, via jason miller announced earlier today they have now raised in excess of $8 million since the indictment came down last week. this certainly indicates that the republican apparatus is rallying around the former president. if not sitting lawmakers up on capitol hill. only a handful have actually endorsed him for 2024. so far, they are sort of unanimously standing behind him when it comes to this trial. what do you make of the campaign season which is about to get into full swing? >> martha: it's a great observation, gillian. jeb bush, his nemisis, you remember he called him low energy jeb on the debate stage in 2015, jeb bush among those coming forward and saying he

thinks it looks like a very weak case, and a way to go after this former president that may not in the end amount to much. unwise is the word from david french, both people who have been very dug in in their opposition to the former president donald trump, but you do see i think a rallying around. i think just a general sense that this is a d.a. who was out to get trump. i mean, he said so from the very beginning and look at his record, 52% of felony charges in the -- in new york city are lowered under alvin bragg to misdemeanor, and just the irony in that gillian as we watch this. and people say he's had to kind of contort the law into interesting ways in order to make this appear a misdemeanor that is now a felony, and whether or not there are 34 felonies that we are going to hear about, which was reported by another outlet early today, so you know, politically i think that we have a lot of chapters to go in this thing when you

look at 2024. you've got a, you know, another, the mar-a-lago case, classified documents case people think has more meat on the bones in terms of obstruction charges coming down the pipeline, but this man has been in the thick of it and people push back on them and he pushes back hard as well, in many cases throughout his entire career. even though it's unprecedented, gillian, it's not an unusual posture for donald trump to be in aggressive mode. >> john: we saw some pictures of the motorcade, currently on the f.d.r., making its way down there. i checked waze and that was the fastest route. jonathan turley, as martha was saying the indictment is under seal, a little leakage around it, probably at least one felony count in there, but we talked in the run-up to this about the way in order to get around the

statute of limitations and to charge a former american president for the very first time in history criminally, alvin bragg did some creating accounting with the charges and boot strapping up a misdemeanor to a felony. >> that's right. technically this misdemeanor that's been widely discussed is as dead as dillinger. it is -- it has a two-year statute of limitations that has passed. in order to bring this back to life, if that is the basis of the indictment, he has to convert it into a felony, and for months the theory that's been discussed is he'll allege a federal election violation, a violation that the department of justice chose not to charge. so this is a host of problems with that. the question whether he has a crime to begin with. the problem, many of us don't think there is a federal

election violation here and he's had to go through, as martha says, contortions to try to do this. now, the other side has said wait to see the indictment, there's going to be some surprises, some new crimes. well, we'll have to see. but what's interesting about this trip to the courthouse, this isn't the white bronco o.j. simpson trip, you know. people are looking at these cars and seeing completely different things. half of this country views it as a president who is being taken to answer for alleged crimes. the other half tends to view this as an indictment of the criminal law system, that this is the weaponization of our legal system. and this is only going to deepen that divide and that is concerning for many of us. >> let's pick up a thread there, trey, jonathan just said

essentially this entire case is a rorschach test for the nation and depending where you sit is determining what you see transpiring on your tv screen today. i mentioned a moment ago that republicans have said this entire criminal indictment is political persecution masquerading as law. the trump's critics, though, say it's not as if district attorney alvin bragg handed down this indictment unilaterally. he had to get at least 12 of the 23-person grand jury to agree to press criminal charges. >> gillian, of all the really tough things i've had to do in my life, getting a grand jury to indictment someone would not be on that list. it's just not a difficult thing to do. the burden of proof is the lowest one that we have in our legal system. i think it's a test, but some ways the american people have already failed the test.

if the polling is correct, and people -- we have protestors out there saying this indictment is great, or this indictment is terrible. the one thing they all have in common, no one has read it. so it would be wonderful if we could like maybe wait and see if there are any surprises or look, i've thought it was the wrong prosecutor, the wrong facts, and the wrong legal basis. but i am open to being surprised if there is something else in it. the only thing that shocks me, gillian, the number of people say we think politics was involved but still support the indictment. that's what the criminal justice system should not be about. rewarding political friends or punishing political foes. this is not just trump on trial. i think in many ways it is how much we really believe that we are a nation of laws and not a nation of women and men. >> john: andy mccarthy is a former federal prosecutor,

you've seen your fair share of cases that have to deal with election issues. it looks like what is happening here is bragg is trying to take what was a financial, potential financial crime and trying to make it into a campaign finance violation by taking a welding torch and welding together state and federal law. do you think he can make this fly? >> i don't, john, and largely for the reasons that jonathan alluded to for a few moments ago. first of all, as a matter of law, this is not a campaign finance violation. but i think even before you get to that there is a very important statutory construction issue under new york law. in order to inflate this misdemeanor into a felony, the felony version of falsification of business records under new york law says you have to be trying to conceal another crime. i think the fair reading of what

that means in the new york penal law is they are talking about another new york crime. the idea that that opens the pandora's box to any crime you can imagine is unfathomable to me. it doesn't say anything in there about being able -- giving a district attorney jurisdiction to enforce a federal crime and i wonder what the limiting principle is. would a crime against a law of france be ok? so i think that question has to be addressed first because if he doesn't have jurisdiction to enforce something other than a new york crime, the case is over. and then even if you get out of the lingo box, the proof problem, he would have to prove that trump knew he was committing another crime and intentionally acted in order to conceal that. the thought that trump knew that this was a campaign finance

violation when in reality it wasn't is farfetched. but even if it was, that he would know that and appreciate it, also seems even more farfetched to me, and then you have the problem that his motive in acting cannot be to conceal a dubious campaign finance violation. i think the strong tendency of the proof, at least as we understand it at the moment, he was acting for the same reason the nondisclosure arrangement was made in the first place, which was to avoid, you know, political and personal embarrassment. so, i just think this is a mess in terms of trying to elevate this into a felony. >> gillian: we are taking a live like right now at former president trump's motorcade as they are pulling up to the courthouse, the streets were cleared in order for them to travel from trump tower in midtown manhattan down to lower manhattan as quickly as possible with the least amount of disruption to traffic there

midday midtown. >> john: no disruption to closing the f.d.r. for 15 minutes. when he goes in the building, he'll make his way up to the 7th floor for processing, likely involve fingerprinting. the issue of a mug shot was settled and that alvin bragg had agreed there would not be a mug shot, but we'll see, because you never know. things can change. and then from processing, there he is right there, you see the back of his head as he's walking toward the courthouse. the from there he'll go up to the 15th floor where he will await his arraignment, should be in about 50 minutes from now. again, we won't get a live look inside the courtroom, even though these are state charges, would allow for cameras in the courtroom. the judge has agreed to a request from trump's attorneys to not allow cameras in the courtroom. trump's attorneys, gillian, had argued this would create a circus-like environment.

>> gillian: thank goodness we avoided that, john. we will get a look at the former president in the hallways of the courthouse before he enters and when he comes out. we have heard from his team today that he wants to address the american public and the media directly during one or both of those opportunities. obviously if a gag order is imposed during this arraignment, which our legal analysts tell us is unlikely, but if imposed, probably would not hear foreign minister on the other end because he would be under the judge's orders. >> john: on that point, let's bring in martha maccallum. the one thing this president is known for doing is lashing out at anybody who afronts him on social media and whatever platform he can get his hands on as well. as a presidential candidate, could this judge limit his ability to talk about this case and take away the tools the president would use to fight back against the myriad stories

written about this in every publication across america and every television screen across america, for that matter the world? >> martha: i think it's very difficult to get the former president, donald trump, to not talk about something. i think that would be a very difficult bar for him to put on himself. if the judge does impose that. i think it's pretty tricky, and we can get the lawyers to weigh in. but given the fact that this is a former president who served one term and now wants to run for a second term, which i would also just point out is something i think we don't emphasize enough. this is such a highly unusual situation where you have a president who is running for a second term, having, you know, lost in the last election and wants to go back again. and so what we are looking at right now is a president who is facing charges that have -- i think it's fair to say unlikely, but potential jail time who either would see jail time or

potentially go back to the white house. that sums up how unprecedented this is. the gag order would be a unique decision given all of that environment, who we are talking about here and what's fair. my guess is if there's a gag order, the former president will find a way to talk about this right up to the edge and not actually go there in order to allow himself the ability to -- it's kind of -- reminds me of him before he declared he was going to run again, he would sort of talk about how inevitable he was going to run again but not doing it yet, because that would trigger another set of equations financially when you declare for presidency. a gag order on donald trump is an interesting idea. i think it would be very difficult to see how that gets carried out, john. >> gillian: to martha's point, jonathan, the president posted on truth social, heading to lower manhattan, the courthouse, seems so surreal, wow, they are going to arrest me. can't believe this is happening

in america, maga. what do you think the odds of a gag order being imposed during this arraignment are? >> well, the term trump gag order seems a contradiction in terms. the idea that you could succeed in gagging the former president is to attempt something that has never been achieved before. i doubt that he would comply, but i also believe a gag order would be unconstitutional. i'm not a big fan of these gag orders. i think they raise serious free speech questions. in this case, i think that it could very well be unconstitutional. you would be gagging a presidential candidate who has been running on the weaponization of the criminal justice system for four years, you would be telling him he couldn't talk about one of his main talking points. now, having said that -- >> gillian: a quick follow-up, sorry to interrupt you, for clarification, what happens

potentially if he breaks the gag order? are there options available to the judge? what unfolds then? >> there are options. the most upon is you get a hefty fine for violation but you can also be held in contempt. put into custody to answer to the court as to why you disobeyed a clear and open order. you are not supposed to violate these orders. you are supposed to appeal them. i actually think an appeal could strike down such an order there. there is a test for donald trump. many people on his side, critics saying yeah, looks like the politicalization of the criminal justice system. the question is whether he will waste that moment. you know, the president is comfortable in chaos. it may be his element. tends to go on attack. but the question is whether he

will rise above it and seem more presidential to bring reason to the rage and to say instead this is a threat to the presidency, it's not just about me. and we have a point here to raise that regardless of how intense our disagreements may be, we have to have a common article of faith the criminal justice system is not used for political purposes. that's the message that will resonate, i think, with many people who may not be his supporters. >> john: jonathan, martha, andy and trey, stand by. we'll come back to you. but first, bryan is live outside the courthouse. >> there are i would say pro trump supporters lined up here behind our cameras, the media. holding on to the bench trying to get a view of what's happening. obviously the former president is inside. i do want to talk a little about what we can expect inside during

the arraignment. we know he's being processed, what the schedule said, processed and brought to the courtroom for his 2:15 arraignment. i think we will learn more about the possible motions that his defense team will want to file. that will be probably one of the most substantive things out of today's hearing. for instance, the motion to dismiss the case outright, the motion to perhaps change the venue. it will give us an inside look into the playbook for his defense team and schedule that out when the next hearing will happen, and a substantive thing. and fascinating in the sense, the former president will be face-to-face with the judge, and the judge, i will say, his fourth trump case, you know. he oversaw the trump organization case in which the organization was fined $16 million, he oversaw the case that sent the former cfo, alan wieselberg to prison for five

months, and about to oversee the steve bannon case over the border wall and defrauding donors later this year and a lot made whether the d.a. bragg had any say in the judge. and we were told the d.a. has no say, that is a decision made by the court and usually it's random, but if a judge has the kind of intel or has, for instance, overseen cases that are related, and in this case he obviously has, having overseen three of those cases i just mentioned, then that trump's those other things, for lack of a better word there. and that is why he would perhaps see this case. so i think it's going to be fascinating in the sense this is obviously somebody that the former president on truth social, says he hates trump outright, and his attorney said no, no, no, pulling back on

that, saying we don't think he's biased. fascinating to see how the judge reacts to the former president and defense lawyers and what the playbook will be from his defense. i think that will probably be the most substantive things in terms of the motions laid out by him. >> john: he was appointed by then mayor bloomberg to the family court in 2006, judge merchan's life and case load has certainly taken a turn for the more, i guess, greater public visibility as well as notoriety here. >> gillian: this is gillian, in order for trump to receive these charges today at the courthouse, what went on preceding this is that at least 12 out of the 23 grand jurors assigned to this case had to agree there was enough material evidence to press forward with this case.

>> yeah, that's right. and 12 out of 23, again, is a low bar. they were able to move forward with that. so again, i think what trey was saying is spot on. we will all learn very shortly about what's in this indictment and what kind of evidence they perhaps have and also obviously hear from d.a. bragg and i do want to give people a sense of the process out here. obviously cameras are not allowed inside the courtroom, but obviously there's people out here that are gathered and the president and journalists who were let inside. some journalists were given a green ticket and will be inside the courtroom to do you want what's happening. others were given a white ticket and they'll be in the overflow room and the journalists, as soon as they are able to once the arraignment is done, will relay to the rest of us and the world what was said and we will send a producer to the clerk to get a copy of the indictment. we have no indication it's going to be handed out to the press willy nilly, to anybody who shows up to court, but as soon as we get a sense of the

indictment we'll be able to go through the charges and finally verify what's been reported for over the last couple of weeks. and gillian, one more point, new york law states if you were to break a gag order and implemented by the judge, $1,000 fine and up to 30 days in prison, or both. but we don't know what's going to happen. i wanted to clarify that in the sense of what kind of punishment we are talking about here in new york. >> gillian: just want to plag for the viewers, there was a head-on shot of the president, a fist bump to the crowd before he headed inside the courthouse. bryan, we will come back to you. >> john: trey, bryan mentioned probably a couple motions filed, one of those would be summary dismissal of the case. we don't know if the judge would entertain that, but a pro forma

thing most defense attorneys do and potential request for change of venue. looks like it's something the former president is pushing. truth social, he said "very unfair venue with some areas that voted 1% republican, this case should be moved to nearby staten island would be a very fair and secure location for the trial. additionally, highly partisan judge and his family are well-known trump haters." he points out the judge's daughter worked for kamala harris's campaign as well. based on the fact that i don't know where you would find a juror who has not made up their mind about donald trump and find an impartial jury in this, the venue and overwhelming sentiment of folks in manhattan when it comes to donald trump, does he have a good case for a change of venue, even if it stays in the five boroughs of new york city?

>> john, i think you would be surprised am some of your fellow citizens and how little they know about current events. we have gotten juries in other high profile cases before, i know andy mccarthy is one of our panelist, a boy when aaron burr was charged but aaron marshal the chief judge, and i don't think it was granted there. the judge has to get the voir dire and the panel in there, can you be fair, and look, i'm not the lawyer that turley and mcc mccarthy are, but if you are complaining about pretrial publicity having a rally could undercut that. if the argument there is too much pretrial publicity, then a rally could be contributing to the pretrial publicity.

>> gillian: let's talk about the charges who are hopefully going to be unsealed imminently, we don't know what's in there, a lot of finger pointing and speculation to date, but we know thanks to court leaks, direct to fox news channel, 30 distinct charges, one is reportedly a felony. what types of charges could be included here? we know that all eyes are on the alleged hush money payments to stormy daniels. some reporting there could be charges related to karen mcdougall as well, other kinds of business dealings. what is the likelyest scenario? >> i'm terrible at speculating. my guess would be, prosecutors think if i don't have great facts, let me have a bunch of counts. it might be 34 different

instances of michael cohen being reimbursed for legal expenses by the former president. if it's 34 discreet fact patterns, 34 different stormy daniels and mcdougalls, that may be a challenge. but if it's the same fact pattern and 34 different versions of the exact same picture, i think the perception is going to be that that's an act of desperation and the prosecutor is trying to stack it to make it look like it's really important because they have weak facts. >> gillian: trumped up charges, pardon the pun. >> john: andy mccarthy, i know you were not a young lad when aaron burr was tried, you were in law school, as i recall. trey makes the point, andy, an impartial jury was found for that trial. can an impartial jury be found for donald trump? i think since "hamilton," the

play came out, everyone knows who aaron burr is. seriously, i think it's a big issue. i appreciate what trey said. i don't know anybody who doesn't know donald trump and has not formed an opinion one way or the other. >> john, i appreciate you and trey, my sons think i was at the trial of socrates. in terms of the fairness of the jury, in the mid 1990s in the very area, our federal courthouse is probably a block and a half from where they are now, we tried a dozen terrorists who were implicated in the bombing of the world trade center eight blocks away from the courthouse, terrorists are obviously, you know, deeply, deeply unpopular defendants, and every review in court that looked at that thought that they

got a very fair trial. so i think if the process is fair and the court is fair, you can get a fair trial. moving the trial to staten island would not make -- would not make much of a difference, not only because of how you point out trump is a high profile public figure, but also you know, we have had cases where -- when the trial gets moved, that doesn't mean you get a new judge, and if the judge is the problem for the president, i think a judge can be a much bigger problem than a jury, and he comes with the case to staten island. that really does not advance the ball for trump. my attitude about this, i refuse to indulge the fiction that this is an episode of the criminal justice system doing justice. under circumstances where this is a purely infused, pervasive political process where you have a district attorney who is only

nominally a district attorney substantively we would better understand alvin bragg as elected democrat ran for office vowing he would leverage the powers of his office against his partisan enemies, like his day job. his night job is actually dismissing the cases of criminals who are preying on new yorkers. but he vowed this would be a political objective of his. he's now achieved it. and i just think, you know, with all due respect for trey's point about trump having a rally and that taints the jury pool as much as, you know, anything else that can be done here, the thought that you could have a political prosecutor run for office on using his power to do exactly what he's done and continue himself over a year to taint the jury pool and now that

he's filed an indictment we are going to blow the whistle and say ok, now due process starts and we all have to be very concerned about tainting the jury? forget it. i mean, that's ridiculous. right now this is a highly partisan, highly political process. we have a progressive prosecutor who has taken a crime that he would not prosecute against anyone conceivably except donald trump. he would never bring this misdemeanor against anyone. he's brought it against trump. it's time barred, bringing it against trump anyway, trying to dress it up into a felony by invoking federal law he doesn't have jurisdiction t prosecute, that's how we land in court. that's a political persecution, not the criminal justice system. >> gillian: martha, back to you for a moment, regardless of what unfolds how and in what order

today, the former president now finds himself in this unprecedented territory of needing to navigate and fight a legal battle. he's facing the problems spent of criminal indictment right now, while he is pursuing re-election to 1600 pennsylvania avenue. how does the campaign drive this forward? how does he ride a platform that's focused on voters while fighting this legal battle? >> martha: yeah, it's a great question and it really goes, i think, to the uniqueness and history of this political figure of donald trump. we are getting a closer look inside. one of the side doorways here. and gillian, i want to reread the message that the former president sent while he was headed down there, you mentioned earlier, and this is what he sent out on truth social. heading to lower manhattan, the courthouse, seems so surreal,

wow. they're going to arrest me in caps. can't believe this is happening in america. and then maga with an exclamation point. i think that former president trump looks at any given situation and says how can i make this work, how can i take what's being thrown at me, in this case, and how can i make it work for me, and i think that they have done everything they can to try to put the message out there that he is being unjustly persecuted, you heard from andy mccarthy, a strong legal argument why that would be the case in this particular set of circumstances and they have fund raised quite a bit on this issue and they are even getting support from people who are not big supporters of president trump. so i think that you are seeing this and i think we may get a chance to hear something from the former president in this hallway, we did hear that there were positions there where we might be able to hear from him.

we'll jump out if that happens. but i think he's going to make the best of it, gillian, and turn it to his advantage in every possible way and a lot of motions, i think you will see it dragged out as much as his attorneys possibly can because they do believe this charge at least, this indictment is unmerited. >> john: jonathan turley, bring you in, i've been texting back and forth with one of president trump's sons eric, father is feeling strong, he's sad for this country but i, eric, have never met someone with more backbone and makes the point, alvin bragg has shut down the entire city, called up 38,000 nypd police officers, closed down the f.d.r. and is spending $200 million of city funds for a 130,000 nondisclosure agreement. eric trump says i never thought i would see this political corruption in our country.

i guess, jonathan, when prosecutors go after a target, they don't care how much it costs, they just want to try to get a kill. >> that's it. the problem this case has a thrill kill feeling about it. when you look outside that courtroom, there are people who are truly thrilled by this prospect. but it is not a thrilling prospect for many of us. we have to see what is in this indictment but what we have heard previously over weeks and months really raise serious concerns for many of us, that this is not blind justice. that there is no way that this charge would ever have been brought against anyone but donald trump. they are just working too hard. and that does play into the venue issue. i agree with everything that was said previously. broad venue change motions, they

are routinely turned down. i will one case i thought was a lead pipe cinch for a motion and still turned down. judges tend not to transfer high profile cases. and part is because they believe the united states is a media-saturated environment and will not get away from that, particularly someone like donald trump. but you also don't have a d.a. who ran on the promise to back trump and was elected into office by people in this district based partially on that pledge. that's something you don't often have in the mix of a venue change. and the question is whether the judge is going to want to make some type of gesture to the many people in the country who feel this is a political prosecution by at least moving this out of manhattan. but i think what you are going to see is this is sort of super tuesday, a legal super tuesday for donald trump. this is the beginning of a new type of presidential campaign.

we have not faced this issue since a socialist ran for office while incarcerated. this president will run on this issue and the public may be voting on it. starting today, a presidential election like one we have never seen before, where the criminal justice system itself may be on the ballot. >> gillian: andy, i want to ask you about what is going on behind closed doors right now, a shot inside the courtroom, we obviously don't have eyes on the former president, but what is happening now as we speak is that he is surrendering, he is turning himself in. when we next see him walk out those doors and walk into the arraignment is he going to be under arrest? what do you talk about, or how do you talk about this moment we are living through right now? >> yeah, there's a common understanding what arrest is, people think of getting handcuffs slapped on you on the

street. what it really means legally is that your capability to leave is not -- is no longer your own. in that sense, he is under arrest now because he is surrendered on the charges. and it will be an arrest on his, you know, his future criminal record. what typically happens in this situation is you are put through a process. we understand that this process probably won't include mug shots, photographs, but he'll be fingerprinted, that happens to everybody who comes into the system. the fingerprints will go into a criminal justice database that all the police organizations across the country have access to. typically, and there's nothing typical about this, but in the typical case there would be an opportunity for the police potentially to kubt an

interview, or at least the inspectors from the district attorney's office, that won't happen here because former president trump is formally indicted, he has a right to counsel at all material moments in his prosecution going forward. his lawyers are obviously not going to allow him to be interviewed. so they will wait in a secure area until an appointed time. he won't be put in a lock-up like most defendants would where they would wait for being presented in court. >> gillian: andy, can i follow-up quick? does this mean from this point going forward, donald trump is not free of his own volition to leave the courthouse until the judge tells him he may? >> this is another one of these things, gillian, we have to say let's hope they don't test the boundaries of that. my view of this all along is the secret service is an excellent organization. the nypd is probably the best

police force in the world. the district attorney's office has good inspectors. what i assume is everybody is cooperating so that everybody gets what they need out of this. the police need to make sure he's processed. the secret service need to make sure he's safe. so i don't think the former president is going to try to rock the boat by saying you know, i think i'm going to get up and leave, which would then put people to the test of what their authority is. i think he's just going to roll with what they are doing so they'll allow the secret service to keep him in a secure location. the nypd will be involved in that, and when the appointed time comes they will bring him before a judge. i think we know who the judge is supposed to be, this judge merchan, at least that's what the trump people have put out and should be a quick proceeding. arraignment. a police complaint they call it

a presentment and you don't have to entire a plea, but here he is indicted, so a formal arraignment. he'll issue a plea. under new york law he'll be released on his own recognizance and the judge should set a discovery schedule and motion schedule and as a number of my co-panelists have pointed out, the motion schedule is the most important thing, i think it's a case that ought to be dismissed on the papers before it ever gets to trial. >> john: i think former president trump is expecting he will be allowed to leave the courthouse because he has at 8:00 tonight plans for a news conference at mar-a-lago after he gets back to florida. what we are looking at now is the corridor outside the courtroom. this is on the 15th floor at 100 center street. the president as we understand now would have been on the 7th floor for processing. he'll move his way up to this

floor where he'll go in the courtroom, again, no live cameras inside the courtroom. unless things have changed, and i don't believe they have, there will be a still photographer there and one photo of the arraignment will be allowed to be released. we also understand that the former president may come up to the camera that's taking this picture and say something prior to entering the courtroom and unless there's a gag order imposed by judge merchan, likely say something on the way out as well. martha, trey was making the point that alvin bragg ran on a platform of putting, or getting a criminal conviction against former president trump. he's not the only one, because the new york state attorney general, letitia james, ran on the same platform. there are several politicians in new york state who have run on a campaign to get president trump. >> martha: absolutely, and there

was video of letitia james that proved that, and andy mccarthy sees bragg less as a d.a. and more of a sort of political figure, he's been so open about his attitude and motivation to get trump. so, you know, what we learned is that after they sort of stepped aside from some of the financial investigation that they were doing, then they brought in this michael colangilo, a former d.a. attorney, and let's open that up little bit by little bit through that and let's see if we can put together a case against donald trump, and it was as you know, from 2015 this hush money question of which ledger this financial line of this expenditure was put on and whether it was put in the right place or not is really what this comes down to, and then you know to stretch it out and make it to

a felony. and thinking about the widow of a new york city police officer who spoke at his funeral, and she basically said that d.a. bragg had made the city unsafe and unsafe for everyone, and unsafe for police officers, and she basically blamed him from the podium at his funeral for making this city unsafe. and then you think about when we read the time and effort and money and as eric trump talked about, shutting down the city in order to bring in this person for this charge it just raises so many questions and i think that there is this mentality out there that you know, that someone needs to get him, right. and so it really just flies in the face of lady justice who is blindfolded because as jonathan turley said before, it's impossible to imagine alvin bragg with bring these charges if they are, as we expect them to be, caveat, against anyone

except for donald trump in this case, guys. >> gillian: stand by, i want to bring in bret baier, the anchor and executive editor of "special report," and also fox news chief political anchor. bret, amazingly, as this is unfolding, the white house press briefing is underway. karine jean-pierre was just asked about how president biden is taking all of this in, she said in part, this is not something he is focusing on. obviously he will catch part of the news when he has a moment but it's not his focus. what do you make of that? >> not surprising, and as far as commenting on it, you heard president biden side step questions about it as well. but just 30,000 feet looking at this moment, it is surreal, you know. around the world other countries have charged, indicted and brought to trial former leaders,

france, italy, israel, others. but we, as a country, have never done that. we have never as a country done what you are seeing right now. and that is what makes this historic. but as far as the charges that we are likely to see in coming minutes and in the hour or so, it's a lot of people wonder whether it rises to that moment. we'll see what's in there. but there are other things happening for the former president on other fronts that perhaps are more ominous. for example, just about an hour ago the u.s. appeals court here in washington ruled 3-0 against a trump attorney effort to prevent key aides to president trump from testifying to the special counsel jack smith and his team, that includes the former white house chief of staff, mark meadows. among that three-judge panel, was a trump appointed appeals court judge, so that's a loss

for the trump team and they are moving forward with the case about interfering in the elections, and also on january 6th. l -- those plus the documents case at mar-a-lago are problems, potentially, but this is the first thing we are seeing historically of a former president being charged. >> john: we have some movement in the courthouse, a number of people came in, of course likely some other cases going on as well or just those were other people involved in the process. we do expect, bret, at some point in the next few minutes, the arraignment starts in just over 15 minutes that we will see the former president walk through those doors and toward the camera. again, we are told that the former president will likely want to make some sort of a comment to the camera there in the courthouse before he goes in for the arraignment. and then if he's allowed to by

the judge, make a comment on the way out. bret, we kind of kicked this around with martha and andy and jonathan and trey before, but let get your thoughts on it. do you believe, whether constitutionally or otherwise, this judge would be able to impose a gag order on not just a former president, but a current presidential candidate? >> i think it's really tough to defend big picture and constitutionally. the legal minds will probably have more of a backing on this, but i think it would be tough politically to defend especially since it's a district attorney who started this whole campaign, campaigning on trying to go after former president trump. i think the gag order, if it comes down, can be pretty quickly taken to court and challenged. in this case in particular. >> gillian: bret, we know from previous cases that criminal