mimi rocca, were you trying to weigh in at the end. what's your take? >> thanks, kasie. i just think, first of all, it's remarkable mr. dershowitz's initial argument now, how far we've come. originally trump's defense was there was no meeting. then it was there was a meeting but they only talked about adoptions. then it was trump didn't know about the meeting. now it appears we've gotten to the point he knew about but no crime was committed. i think that that in and of itself, the sort of path of this defense by trump's team is telling, but i also think we can't look at this meeting in isolation. it is very significant, if true, that he knew about the meeting. that doesn't mean that a crime begins and ends there. you have to look at everything that came before it and everything that came after it. remember, after that meeting is when trump gave that speech, calling on the russians to get more of hillary clinton's e-mails, and they actually did, we know, go in then and start fishing into her campaign directly. >> basically the day of, day after. >> yes. >> let me answer t