professor dershowitz, let me begin with you. think that sara's report tonight, what are the firewalls? i don't have any new information. it sounds very nefarious and to me. >> i have no idea. that's why it from the beginning i call for a nonpartisan complete investigation by expert to all aspects of this whole election. we have to get to the bottom of this. we have to have testimony that's open to the public, not behind closed doors of the grand jury. the american public is entitled to know what these things mean. i have no idea what these firewalls are referring to, but enough to open up some kind of investigation. can i, just briefly on your opening monologue? i wrote a piece for "the boston globe" arguing that if the president revokes the security clearance only of his critics, that would raise a serious first amendment question. it would be a close question because he's not shutting them down, people can say what they want. they just don't have access to the material. if they don't have access to the material, what that mean

re-joining us now for reaction, alan dershowitz, and sol wisenberg. okay, guys.ow potentially serious, or not, is the deal with referring both podesta and greg craig to the southern district of new york? greg craig, full disclosure, work for my old law firm, and they parted ways. months back. let's start with you, professor dershowitz. what is going on here? >> greg is a great guy. he lives on martha's vineyard with me. i see them periodically over the summer. full disclosure. look, this proves that you never needed a special counsel. they are taking these cases mori and more and referring them to ordinary u.s. attorney's office. the manafort case could have been tried by the u.s. attorney's office in northern virginia. the other manafort case by the district of columbia he was -- u.s. attorney's office. why do we need a special counsel? the cases don't involve russia for the most part were the only cases that involve russia are cases that will never be tried at all, the 12 russians. they are not coming to disneyland any day soon to be served. they're not going t

like you like alan dershowitz to this day he's anti-left alan dershowitz said to me i have the video it's on video alan dershowitz lifelong liberal hillary clinton supporter professor of law at harvard i am far as a jew and as a liberal i am far more afraid of the left than of the nazis he was on this show and there she was he's a hillary fan now he's does not favor trump's policies he just thinks trump can not be indicted while sitting on things he thinks the left is ruining the universities he thinks the left is a greater danger to america than the right i have i play that video and all i will we will make a bet alan dershowitz support in twenty twenty oddly enough he will support any democrat correct correct ok i agree that is so you know making him a hypocrite no i'm making him inconsistent which is not uncommon in the human race are you still an orthodox jew i was never an i was own orthodox jew till i was thirteen i was i went to yeshiva i was raised an orthodox jew i am still a religious jew but i am i am an oddball in that i am a deeply religious jew who believes that the tou

professor dershowitz, what you make of this development? the posted concessions, they don't on the concessions to me. down from 49 questions, some in writing. as a change the calculus? >> i don't think so. it's not about quantity. it's all about quality. all he has to do is ask one question, what was your motive, why did you file your comey, or why did you ask comey may be to go easy on flynn? all they want to do is get him to say in a context where he would be charged with a crime, something that is controversial, and something that somebody else will come in and testify and say, no, he told me something different. no, he told me that his motive was this or that. motives are so vague and subjective. and you can be charged with lying to prosecution officials, even if you tell the truth. if there is another witness who comes in and gives a different account and the prosecutor is trying to get you. they want to put you in perjury trap. believes or says he believes tho made out only be singing, but he may be composing, in order to get a better

so where does this robert mueller investigation go, alan dershowitz?'m hoping that they help the system of checks and balances in the midterms. i don't think robert mueller will impact the election. i think is getting too late now for report to come out because if we had a report now it would be seen as designed to impact the elections. and the justice department regulations preclude that from happening. if it doesn't happen right away, and it will not happen it is not resolved of the present will sit down. they'll have to wait until december to release this. i do not see robert mueller impact in the election. but i think the president has a problem of immigration in healthcare and his tone and i do not see how that can be changed or improved between now and then. i do think that the democrats will do much better in the house and if they do better in the senate will have an impact on the supreme court. maria: and of course, we waiting on confirmation of brett kavanaugh. which most people think the votes will be there.at this point, american people want

like you like alan dershowitz to this day he's anti-left alan dershowitz said to me i have the video it's on video alan dershowitz lifelong liberal hillary clinton supporter professor of law at harvard i am far as a jew and as a liberal i am far more afraid of the left than of the nazis he was on the show and there she was he's a hillary fan now he's does not favor trump's policies he just thinks trump can not be indicted while sitting on things he thinks the left is ruining the universities he thinks the left is a greater danger to america than the right i have i play that video well i will we will make a bet yeah who will alan dershowitz support in two thousand and twenty oddly enough he will support any democrat correct correct ok i agree that is so you know making him the hypocrite no i'm making him inconsistent which is not uncommon in the human race are you still an orthodox jew i was never an i was own orthodox jew till i was thirteen i was i went to yeshiva i was raised an orthodox jew i am still a religious jew but i am i am an oddball in that i am a deeply religious jew who

like you like alan dershowitz to this day he's anti-left alan dershowitz said to me i have the video it's on video alan dershowitz lifelong liberal hillary clinton supporter professor of law at harvard i am far as a jew and as a liberal i am far more afraid of the left than of the nazis he was on this show and there she was he's a hillary fan now he's does not favor trump's policies he just thinks trump can not be indicted none of the last things he thinks the left is ruining the universities he thinks the left is a greater danger to america than the right i have i play that video we will make a bet alan dershowitz support in twenty twenty oddly enough he will support any democrat correct correct ok i agree that is so you're making him a hypocrite no i'm making him inconsistent which is not uncommon in the human race are you still an orthodox jew i was never an i was only orthodox jew till i was thirteen i was i went to yeshiva i was raised in with an ox jew i am still a religious jew but i am i am an oddball in that i am a deeply religious jew who believes that the tourist from god

he would say no. >> 20 minutes later -- i think dershowitz is right. what rudy and company are trying to do is seeming like the reasonable ones. we are willing with a few exceptions to do this thing. if they say we tried. we are at an impasse it's their fault. >> it is a p.r. battle. but you are only hearing from one side. could you imagine if floyd mayweather and manny pacheo were going to fight? the president and his team have been very vocal. they are maneuvering. they interviewed so many people, whatever they laid out we have given them. how does the mueller team counter that? >> the white house is taking that to their advantage. the mueller team is not going to comments on all the attacks that are happening. their strategy is to stay focused, be professional so when they do go into a court of law or issue any indictment, that they have credibility as legal professionals. instead of getting buried in the politics of what they are accused of. the clinton victory party on election tonight. if you look at the strategy coming from the white house. giul

joining us is alan dershowitz and cnn's chief legal analyst jeffrey toobin.to go back to this thing which is, i mean, if lanny davis is saying that michael cohen is unburdened. he doesn't care about immunity. he wants to speak the truth. can he just speak the truth? >> sure. >> i mean he's raising money for people to pay him to speak the truth and fund him. can he just hold a press conference? >> he could. i mean, he is also under the thumb of the prosecutors at this point, and they may not want him to go public at this point. i mean, they may want -- they may be continuing their investigation, they don't want his story out there. >> mueller prosecutors -- >> mueller prosecutors -- particularly the southern district, because that's where his case is. i don't though what thefully has been between cohen and the prosecutors, but certainly, as a legal matter, there's nothing stopping him from telling his story right now. >> professor dershowitz, you said that the white house, that the assertion that the white house made today that the president committed to crime

it is not based on anything real. >> alan dershowitz, professor dershowitz, you are on the phone withdent said he is basing that notion on what he has heard from great scholars. i am guessing that he means you. i think he watches you on tv quite a bit. you have said there never should have been a special counsel, but i don't believe you have said that robert mueller is doing an illegal investigation. >> quite the opposite. i've said that i disagree with my friends, even a great scholar who has written a powerful article arguing the case of special counsel and giving him the ability to rule without the senate is illegal and plausible situation and here i agree with jeffrey toobin. i always said i thought the appointment of special counsel was lawful. i thought it was unnecessary and the southern districts and other districts could handle it. i thought it raised serious policy questions, there's really no check and balance effectively on the special counsel. i've been critical of special counsel. if the president meant me, i'd be flattered if he called me a great legal scholar, i think

back with me, alan dershowitz, author of "the case against impeaching trump." also john dean.r dershowitz, the president continues to call the entire russia situation a hoax, a witch hunt. he sometimes just focuses on the notion of collusion as being the hoax and the witch hunt but oftentimes he just paints a very broad picture of it like that. it does seem to ignore the fact that mueller has already brought dozens of criminal charges against more than 20 defendants, including four trump associates. >> well, i think more important, his own intelligence agencies have warned us about continuing russian attempts to intervene in the election. i give much more weight to that than i do to indictments. indictments are, after all, just charges. they haven't been proved. but the intelligence agencies who are appointed by president trump are saying categorically that there is a continuing and ongoing effort to intrude into the election. and so i think that has to be taken pretty much as a given at this point. >> the president, though, even when he was reading a statement after helsinki

dershowitz, thanks so much for about being here.orney-client privilege or in this case the executive privilege to allow you to testify if you had something to hide? >> it's a very, very tough call for any lawyer. look. there is no lawyer lawyer-client privilege between the president of the united states and the white house counsel. the white house counsel is not the personal lawyer of the president. he or she is the lawyer for the white house, the government of the united states. so there was probably no lawyer-client privilege to waive waive. as far as executive privilege is concerned, it's a tough call. and unless you know everything that the lawyers know, it's awfully hard to second-guess it, because the president's position is he did nothing wrong. and if he did nothing wrong, he has nothing to fear from his white house counsel having a full sit-down with the special counsel. alice it doesn't risk anything for the president because the president can't be charged with anything based on what the counsel said, he can't be charged w

do you agree with what dershowitz?> no prosecutor is going to accept those kinds of preconditions. but there's a reason -- and i do agree with, and have long agreed with professor dershowitz's assertion that the president shouldn't go in and answer these questions. it's far too dangerous. but there's a reason mueller has put up with this dance for so long. and i think a lot of people don't understand it. if he issues the subpoena to force president trump to be interviewed by him, to go to the grand jury, for example, certainly president trump has to accept that subpoena. you can subpoena a president. but then when president trump invokes executive privilege, under the law, the current law in the d.c. circuit, it is going to be very difficult and time-consuming for bob mueller to ask the questions he wants to ask, particularly about obstructions and there is absolutely no guarantee that he will win. you're talking about the heart of executive privilege here, presidential communications and presidential thought processes

that debate with the key congressman, eric swalwell up against law professor, alan dershowitz. the facts that matter this week. >>> good morning and welcome to "this week." american politics lost a giant last night. john mccain passed away at the age of 81 after stopping treatment for brain cancer. he will lie in state in the arizona capital, the u.s. capitol, and then a full dress funeral at washington's national cathedral before his burial at the naval academy in annapolis. this morning, flags flying at half staff at the white house and the u.s. capitol. tributes pouring in from across the country and around the world. presidents, his colleagues in congress and the military and his daughter, meghan. all that i am is thanks to him. now that he is gone, the task of my lifetime is to live up to his example, his expectations and his love. the example john mccain set, extraordinary by any measure. >> reporter: fighter, maverick, hero. senator john mccain spent his life in service to the country he loved. his loyalty, first and always to his country. he came from military royalty.

dershowitz is here to tell us what should and should not be included. and representative steve scalise joins us on the increasing hostility republicans face these days including a death threat he just received. but first, big tech and the new corporate censorship. that's the focus of tonight's "angle." remember what zuckerberg said in april? >> we do not allow hate speech, terrorist content, nudity, anything that makes people feel unsafe in the community. from that perspective that's why we generally try to refer to what we do as a platform for all ideas. >> laura: a platform for all ideas, really? facebook and other tech giants have given us ample reasons to doubt that proclamation. the latest example started early yesterday morning when apple pulled several podcasts associated with a controversial and incendiary alex jones from the itunes store. facebook unpublished four of jones' pages claiming they violated the hate speech policy. hours later, youtube decided it wasn't going to miss out on all the fun and youtube suspended the alex jones channel wit

we have legal eagle alan dershowitz on rudy giuliani saying he and the president will have a report to counter special counsel robert mueller's findings. thank you so much for joining us. thank you for watching. honey, politics, we've got the debate behind tomorrow's headlines. i'm elizabeth macdonald. "the evening edit" starts right now. ♪ liz: a let's take a check on the market. stocks clinching though its best august performance in more than four years. more on your money in just a second but first to this. let's get to ed lawrence live from washington, d.c., with the latest what is going on with the trade deal with canada. edward, what's going going on? reporter: liz, i can tell you no deal today but the talks will continue. now the white house did send a letter intent to have a trade deal with both mexico and canada, if they're willing. that starts a 90-day clock to possibly ratify a trade deal with canada included in it. with a statement from u.s. trade representative robert lighthizer says quote, today the president notified the intent to sign a trade agreement with mexico and c

harvard law school professor alan dershowitz and fox news contributor andy mccarthy.re, professor, i watched you both last week and it was great hysteria as the manafort verdict came in. a great speculation. lanny davis has backed off a lot of his comments, which is pretty fascinating. and professor, you kept saying this isn't even jaywalking as it relates to the president. can you explain to america's dumb pundit lawyer class why you are right and they are so wrong? >> first, i completely understand why people are so anxious to try to find crimes against trump, but you just can't make it up. you have to look at the rule of law and if you look at the statute, the statute says that a candidate can contribute any amount of money once into his own campaign and president trump has said the money came from him personally. also, there's an obligation to report -- the reporting obligation is on the treasurer of the campaign, not the candidate himself. so unless new evidence develops i see no indication of any criminal violation of any of the campaign finance statutes. if the

professor, dershowitz, i want to begin with you. think it means that the trump legal team has not heard from robert mueller in three weeks. do you think that means they are preparing a subpoena? >> i do. i think they're gearing up for what will be a difficult legal battle. i suspect they have come to the same conclusion i came to several weeks ago that the tactic of the trump team -- i have no inside information on this -- but the tactic of the trump team is to make the mueller team an offer they can't accept so that in the end there will be no sit-down and the trump team can say, look, we made them an offer. it's their fault. they didn't accept it. i suspect that mueller is on to this tactic and is now looking forward to filing some kind of a legal action, compelling the president to appear in front of a grand jury. you can't compel the president to sit down with the special counsel, but you can compel him to come in front of a grand jury. >> yep. >> the president will respond with all kind of legal tactics. >> yep. >> and the cour

trump's mind. >> professor dershowitz, what's the risk to the president to have his white house counsel leaving in the middle of an investigation? and is there any risk to don mcgahn as someone who is a witness in this investigation? >> i think there are risks on all sides. there is a risk to keeping him as white house counsel. hard to imagine somebody being a witness against the president and white house counsel at the same time that does raise the specter of the conflict of interest at the same time that i've raised over and over again concerning rod rosenstein. can he be a witness and can he be conducting the investigation? but as the godfather said, keep your enemies close to you. if they were afraid that mcgahn would be turning against the president, the best guarantee would be to keep him close, not to let him go. what the president has done is letting him go and praising him, hoping that that will keep him from providing even more information. remember, this is not the first time this kind of thing has happened. go back to the clinton administration. clinton did not like janet re

harvard law school's al dershowitz, author of "the case against impeaching trump." also john dean, author of some years back of "blind ambition." is it clear that roger stone continues to be a focus of this investigation or at least of interest to this investigation? is that what this can only be about? >> it seems very likely. look, i think everybody hopes this doesn't become what happened in the bill clinton investigation where it started out as whitewater and ended up with sordid sex. this is a serious investigation. it should focus, of course, on russia and russia's involvement in the american election. and i hope that's where the focus remains. >> john, this isn't the first associate of roger stone that the special counsel has talked to. sam nunberg, michael caputo were also questioned by the mueller team about him. >> it appears that they're trying to get a very tight timeline on his activities, his contacts with guccifer 2, to find out what his relationship may or may not have been. to either exonerate him or find to press him to admit whatever role he may or

and of course alan dershowitz is exactly right.ght now because again, mueller -- the scope of the mueller investigation had nothing to do with donald trump's lawful actions as president and i think constitutionally the president's case is rock solid on that. it really does leaves mueller with only one possibility for getting a big scalp and that is catching the president in a perjury trap. and that's why i really don't see his lawyers allowing him to do that no matter how much donald trump -- you know he is chomping at the bit to get out there and testify. quite frankly testifies every day about this over twitter anyway. he wants to do it. >> sandra: thank you. >> bill: "outnumbered" coming up next checking in with harris and melissa. >> the president slapping russia with new sanctions as punishment for the poisoning of a former russian spy and his daughter. as you would think russia denies any role in the crime. whether this will finally quiet critics who say the president is too soft on vladimir putin. what do you think? >> and t

beyond this legal claim which we'll discuss shortly with jeff toobin and allen dershowitz, he said that those payments were lawful. here's what he said to fox. >> did you know about the payment? >> later on i knew. later on. but, you have to understand, what he did and they weren't taking out of campaign finance. that is a much bigger thing. did they come out of the campaign. they didn't. they came from me. i tweeted about it. i don't know if you know, but i tweeted about the payments. but they didn't come out of campaign. in fact, my first question when i heard about it was did they come out of the campaign because that could be a little dicey. and they didn't come out of the campaign. and that's big. but they weren't -- that's not a -- that's not even a campaign violation. if you look at president obama, he had a massive campaign violation. but he had a different attorney general and they viewed it a lot different. >> well, again, the obama campaign violation certainly drew a hefty fine but was a misdemeanor not a felony. as for the claim the payments he made were personal and kosher

. >> so now i'm going to go back in the room here, and i'm going to watch alan dershowitz try to puton this very, very big pig. i'm going to enjoy that. >> well, you have history with him on this because dershowitz at the time pointed out something that was true. you were putting a lot of chips on what was going to happen with michael cohen and what it would mean for your case. but today your stack's looking a little higher. >> a little higher. >> michael avenatti, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> appreciate it. >>> all right. so the president was just incriminated when michael cohen made his allocution in court, made his statement to the judge. that's what avenatti says. that's what michael cohen says. do the great debaters agree? and do they think that michael avenatti has a shot at advancing his case with the president being put under oath? look at who we got for you. cuomo's court is in session, next. with tripadvisor, finding your perfect hotel at the lowest price... is as easy as dates, deals, done! simply enter your destination and dates... and see all the hotels for your

, who once study under professor dershowitz. jeff, the idea that giuliani floated that the conversation never took place, is this some strategic shift or is this just a lawyer who can't keep the story straight? >> no, i think there is method here. you need to look at what giuliani is doing as a political strategy more than a legal strategy, and he is giving choices to what people want -- can believe. they can believe that this conversation never took place. they can believe that if it took place, there was no crime committed there. and i think this is something that the president has been doing, which is basically throw everything up against the wall. and, you know, if you look at the polls, some of it seems to be work. >> professional dershowitz, is there a method there? giuliani did there in the morning shows actually there was a conversation, just not how it was portrayed. >> well, i think jeffrey is absolutely correct. this is a political tactic. and i'm not an expert in politics. it may or may not be working. from a legal p

alan dershowitz. if you are over 30 and you've grown up watching alan dershowitz, it's amazing we got into this place. >> that's exactly right. they are very few liberals left. >> dennis: you know who the liberals are? us conservatives. >> tucker: exactly. chris hahn is a radio show host and he joins us tonight. thanks for coming on. >> any time. so people say all kinds of things like cable tv shows. and what bothers me is when officeholders or people seeking to become officeholders start parroting that same language. so i'm trying to figure out what's acceptable now on the democratic mainstream of which you are a part. so tell me honestly what you think and that will be a marker for where we are. reasonable people talking to each other. a, should we abolish ice and begin criminal prosecution against i.c.e. agents? >> no. but we should reapply some real rules to i.c.e. i don't believe we should do away with it, maybe we have to rebrand it at some. >> tucker: that sounds fine, i'm always for making fed

will get a reaction from legal icon, law professor and liberal alan dershowitz.n a moment, chief white house correspondent john roberts. >> a new fox news poll released this hour showed president's troubles weighing on him slightly. his approval rating slipping a .2 now 45%, his disapproval ratings rising to 53%. after his former personal attorney dropped a large dime on him, there's uncertainty as to where things are headed next. in his first interview since michael cohen accused him of committing a crime, president trump insisted there was no campaign finance violations associated with two hush payments to women because funds used to pay them off came from him. >> president trump: they came from me, i tweeted about it. >> the white house insisted the president is innocent of any wrongdoing. >> the president has a stated a number of times he did nothing wrong. just because michael cohen has made a deal doesn't mean anything regard to the presiden president. >> prosecutors claim president trump directed cohen to make payments to stormy daniels index "playboy" mod

dershowitz said it wasn't smart to authorize it. executive privilege is a real thing that should have been invoked in this case. there are major questions about mcgahn leaving and what that means for session. "the wall street journal" had a great piece about republicans giving sessions encouragement. while we heard graham and others saying they are warming to the fact sessions should leave and trump deserves an attorney general who works for him, there are other republicans who are supportive of sessions, want him to stay in the role. with the passing of senator john mccain, that 50-49 margin in the senate is not -- it's not a strong margin for the president to get somebody confirmed for this job. he's in a very tough situation. >> it's fascinating to look at what has changed with jeff sessions. it only takes a couple of people to start saying more things publically, as lindsay g lindsey graham. there's reporting from cnn and others that fellow gop senators are resigned to the fact that sessions is not long for the job, it could hap

so let's talk about alan dershowitz, a well-known attorney in his own right had this to say about what the president's legal team is presenting as an option to robert mueller. >> they will make mueller an offer he can't accept and in the end mueller will say i can't accept this so we are going to subpoena you. the president will be able to say i wanted to testify. it was mueller who turned it down. >> does this go to the supreme court if they tried to issue a subpoena? >> probably so. hopefully we are not going to go there but i agree with what dershowitz had to say about this which is you can only get the president's testimony if he is the only person and it is the only way to get that testimony. i don't think the case has been shown for that. the area of focus so far has been obstruction of justice, which he has the right to do under article 2 of the constitution and what did he know about this nothing burger meeting in trump tower and they already got testimony on that so if they can't show a compelling need they can't run a subpoena battle and the conditions being put on this are p

he'll listen to rudy giuliani mouth off and alan dershowitz when dershowitz goes on the television to attack robert mueller, and he'll listen to people who repeat the lines that he wants to hear. but he will not listen to good lawyers. donald trump, even in his days back in new york, had trouble finding good lawyers. he took roy cohn, who was senator joe mccarthy's lawyers, he was one of the nastiest lawyers in new york. the bottom line is donald trump doesn't want to listen to good lawyers, good lawyers don't want to work for him. he ends up with people like michael cohen. it's been a disaster. i would never want to be donald trump's lawyer. i wouldn't want to end up going to jail. >> there is a lot of liability that seems to come with working in this white house. thank you, guys. >>> coming up, while robert mueller's team ponders its next move, paul manafort's lawyers want to move his next trial. an investigation update ahead. >>> why this contest is being called a proxy war in the national political debate. "the 11th hour" just getting started on a wednesday night. to rent a movie?

ben, when that is so grave and so serious, why does someone like alan dershowitz argue that is not as big after threat as what is happening at the sdny? >> first of all, i think dershowitz is wildly everystating the point -- overstating the point, and it is not the case that the southern district of new york can do everything that the mueller investigation is doing or that there is, you know, this is not an either/or proposition. in fact, the cohen investigation was referred by mueller to the southern district, right? so there is some degree of interplay between the investigations. but there are aspects of the southern district investigation that are different and more protected than the mueller investigation. so mueller can, under the regs, be removed by rod rosenstein if rosenstein were to conclude that he committed some significant misconduct. you can't remove the southern district of new york, right? and so this is, you know, a problem that develops in that context, is one that you are not going to be able to fire your way out of, and it's really not clear what the mechanism for s

alan dershowitz.f you are over 30 and you grew up watching alan dershowitz, it's amazing. >> he's a liberal, not a leftist. >> tucker: that's exactly right. there are very few liberals lef left. dennis, thank you. >> you know who the liberals are? us conservatives. >> tucker: me, exactly. chris hahn is a radio show host and speaking of chuck schumer, a former staffer for senator schumer and he joins us tonight. think layla coming on. >> any time, tucker. >> tucker: so people say all kinds of lunatic things, i get it. i tend to discount a lot of that stuff. what bothers me is when officeholders are people seeking to become officeholders start parroting that same language. so i am tryingg to figure out what is acceptable now in the democratic mainstream of what you are a part.t. i i will ask you some questions and you tellin me what you thin. reason about people talking to each other. should we abolish i.c.e. and begin criminal prosecution against i.c.e. agents? >> no. but we should reapply some real ru

when we come back, andy mccarthy, alan dershowitz. maybe i will get more out of them.s straight ahead. >> they are much smarter than me. ♪ these folks, they don't have time to go to the post office they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to they use stamps.com print discounted postage for any letter any package any time right from your computer all the amazing services of the post office only cheaper get our special tv offer a 4 week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/save and never go to the post office again enterprise car sales and you'll take any trade-in?rom that's right! great! here you go... well, it does need to be a vehicle. but - i need this out of my house. (vo) with fair, transparent value for every trade-in... enterprise makes it easy. ♪ >> sean: here with reaction to my interview with president trump's attorney, the breaking news tonight, rudy giuliani, former assistant united states attorney for the all-powerful southern district of new york, andrew mccarthy. this book right here, you see it on your scree

well i think based upon what we see in the public that is exactly what it appears like, and alan dershowitzu know it is not just businessmen. it is anyone that doesn't agree with the political establishment here. and unless you can afford to fight the government and all of their resources, it will likely dissuade but we're still waiting on the outcome. liz: one second, if the mueller probe finds that in the trump organization there are real estate deals involving shell companies, russians, that is an issue, right? >> i guess it just depends what they find. we haven't seen anything like that yet. i do believe the outcome will determine what does and does not deter those in the future. liz: that would be activities happened prior to the president winning the election. >> absolutely. liz: katrina pierson. great to see you. >> great to be here. liz: twitter ceo jack dorsey admits twitter bias is left-leaning, but saying twitter does not censor conservatives. coming up we have a army veteran who says wait a minute, twitter you are censoring me. he has proof. >>> tiger woods put a reporter back o

when we come back, andy mccarthy, alan dershowitz. maybe i will get more out of them.>> they are much smarter than me. ♪ pressure... ...that's just my favorite boat. boom. (laughs) make summer go right with ford, america's best-selling brand. and get our best deal of the summer: zero percent financing for sixty months on f-150. right now, get this special offer on f-150: zero percent financing for 60 months - during the ford summer sales event. means passing it down. we know that hunting actually helps our nation's wildlife grow stronger. we know that this isn't just what we do, it's who we are. we know the great outdoors. we love the great outdoors. bass pro shops and cabela's bring you the fall hunting classic - with great deals. like savings of 35% on scentlok savanna crosshair jackets and pants. and save $20 on a 6-pack of big foot b2 full body goose decoys. uhp. i didn't believe it. again. ♪ ooh, baby, do you know what that's worth? ♪ i want to believe it. [ claps hands ] ♪ ooh i'm not hearing the confidence. okay, hold the name your price tool. power of options b

the three of them are all worth a great read.t alan dershowitz. good to see you both.n with you, andy mccarthy, on your piece. if the lawyer gives them 30 hours, the white house counsel, the president goes in. remember, george papadopoulos, h lieutenant general flynn lying and the fbi didn't think that flynn was lying. papadopoulos is basically a nonplayer kid in all of this. why would the president think anything but a perjury trap awaits him? >> i think that that is obviously what the problem is for him here. we have a history of this investigation where one person remembers something one way, somebody else remembers it a different way. the same thing happened with general flynn. first they decide he'she telling the truth. then they decide that he's not. 30 hours of conversation about what the president was saying and what he was thinking in connection with the very actions that mueller is looking into. if the president were to go in and submit to an interview, if he remembers anything differently from the way that his attorney remembers it, the white house counsel,