one of his appointees, amy coney barrett, went along with the liberals on the court. alito was just chatting with trump on the phone about a job for a former clerk. john roberts strikes me as protecting donald trump, his feelings, his ability to act bold boldly as he said in his idruling that donald trump has absolute community and he can commit any crime he wants. i am shocked. i just assumed john roberts is there to protect trump at all costs. >> roi think that's absolutely right. there is a tension between roberts' fealty to donald trump and his fealty to the legitimacy of the court. >> 100%. what i want to talk to you about is we have covered a lot of criminal trials and cases and you wrote a whole book about incarceration, particularly incarceration of people of color. i was a couple weeks old finding out donald trump could be wconvicted of a 34 count felon and still not be called a felon simply because he had not been sentenced. i didn't know that was the rule. i thought that might be news to young black and brown defendants that until they are actually sentence

the three so-called liberal justices were joined by amy coney barrett and chief justice roberts. and if you read their short, you know, one half page order, andrea, as i'm sure you've done, you saw that two things were important to the supreme court, or at least to the five justices who thought the sentencing ought to go forward. one is that mr. trump, as an ordinary criminal defendant, can raise issues on appeal in the appellate courts of new york and perhaps the supreme court of the united states, but also obviously important to those five justices was justice, marchand's promise, essentially, that there would be an unconditional discharge, that there would be no other penalties, that attend the conviction that the sentencing would be final today, and there would be no encumbrance upon the office of the president. and that mattered. now, this case or something like it may come back to the supreme court when mr. trump initiates an appeal of the underlying conviction. does the majority hold? does the immunity decision that we got from the supreme court earlier this i'm sorry, las

are we surprised, jonathan by amy coney barrett? this or not? ett has been playing a centrist role on the court. often voting with the left of the court. she is sort of carving out her own voice and own place i don't want to condemn her for it. >> laura: no it was a thoughtful decision. >> what she did here consistent with what appellate judges do. they prefer overwhelmingly to have these. >> laura: process. >> completed have the sentence in so they can review the whole case. they hate interlocutory appeals they hate these things coming up in partial form. she is consistent in that regard. >> laura: well, any time you say interlocutory appeal on "the ingraham angle" it's time to take a pause. panel, i thank you. thank you, jonathan. i just got cle credit for that thank you so much. >> thank you. >> laura: confirmation hearings for trump's cabinet nominees begin next week and the democrats are already trying to derail them. axios is reporting that chuck schumer is telling his party, get this, to create fireworks at the hearing. he wants revenge fo

it is no surprise that amy coney barrett, somebody to keep your eye on.ause she had actually dissented from the main issue that would have been an issue here so it was really for the presidential immunity decision, it was 5-4. and, this is one where you have the court saying we will treat you like any other defendant. something i take for granted is you know what happens in cases like this, the defendant is sentenced then on appeal, they can raise any an all issues. that's the order of things. here, donald trump said essentially i'm special. i don't want to be sentenced. i want to immediately take an appeal without going through that intermediary step. so it is right the supreme court said no. you can rise this like anyone else. the shocking part of this case is that it was 5-4. to me it means to the extent anyone was looking at bret kavanaugh thinking he was going to be part of a sort of swing of amy coney barrett and bret kavanaugh, he has put his lot in with the arch conservative group. >> and two of those, thomas and alito completely compromised. ther

chief justice roberts and amy coney barrett siding with the three liberals. deciding the first the alleged evidentiary violations of president elect trump state court trial can be addressed in the ordinary course of appeal. second, the burden that sentencing will impose on the president elect's responsibilities is relatively insubstantial in light of the trial court's stated intent to impose a sentence of unconditional discharge after a brief virtual hearing. justices thomas, gorsuch, and alito, they say they would've granted the stay. go figure. with the decision, trump will be the first convicted felon to become president of the united states. breaking barriers right and left these days. he will have to appear virtually and in your courtroom at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow morning for sentencing. the so ruben is a legal correspondent kristy greenberg served as assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york where she was deputy chief of the criminal division. they join me now. let me start with you on the law. you and i talked and i will -- i thought th

it's no surprise that amy coney barrett, who is somebody to keep your eye on because she had actually from the main issue that was -- that would have been an issue here. to it was for the presidential immunity decision, it was really 5-4. and this is one where essentially you have the court saying we are going to treat you like any other defendant. something that i take for granted is you know how what happens in cases like this? the defendant, if he or she is convicted, they are then sentenced and then on appeal they can raise any and all issues. that's the order of things. here donald trump said, essentially, i'm special. i don't want to be sentenced. i want to immediately take an appeal without going through that intermediary step even though everyone else does that. so it's right that the supreme court said, no, that's not the way it works. you can raise this like anyone else. the shocking part of this case is that it was 5-4. it's that you have four justices and to me it means, to the extent anyone was looking at brett kavanaugh and thinking he was going to be part of a sort of s

say one additional thing here, you mentioned the two swing votes, chief justice roberts and amy coney barrett this duo is they read the same opinion polls as you and i do. and so i really think what they try to do here is restore faith in the u.s. supreme court. and, i mean, it is a pretty fair reading of the law. but, you know, we'll see. it is going to a little while for this to get back up to the supreme court again. >> what do you expect to see at 9:30. is this going to be a short process, cut and dry, or are we in for -- >> right, so, we know that donald trump is going to appear virtually, right? judge juan merchan is giving him that option. we also know that at the end of this process, judge juan merchan is going to publicly release audio of this sentencing. so, i suspect what we're going to see later this morning is some stern words from judge juan merchan about how donald trump has tried to undermine the jury system. you'll remember that he was held in criminal contempt of court, ten times, for violating this narrowly tailored gag orders. so, that's why i suspect we're going to see wh

chief justice roberts and amy coney barrett sided with the three liberals on the court. deciding that first the alleged evidentiary olations can be addressed in the ordinary course of appeal. second, the burden that sentencing will impose on the president- president-elect's responsibilities is relatively insubstantial after a brief virtual hearing. justices thomas, gorsuch, kavanaugh, and alito say they would have granted the stay, go figure. but with the 5-4 decision, donald trump will be the first convicted felon to become president of the united states. we're just breaking barriers right and left these days. and he will have to appear virtually in a new york courtroom at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow morning for sentencing. lisa rubin is an msnbc correspondent, kristy greenberg was deputy chief of the criminal division. they both join me now. first of all, let me start with you on the law here. you and i talked, and i'll cop to it, i thought there was no way in heck this was going to happen. he was going to pull some rabbit out of a hat. i may have said the words i bet $ton,000

so first, amy coney barrett, definitely keep your eye on her. >> she she surprised more than once. decision that was sort of heavily criticized by me and many other people. she on important ways was in dissent. so it was really in many key ways a 5 to 4 decision. so that's why keep your eye on her in the future for independence. and i think sort of honesty and integrity in terms of how she appears to be handling herself in the court. the surprise here was that chief justice flipping and going from because amy coney barrett seemed pretty clear, was going to vote along with the three liberal justices. so i was the chief justice who flipped hard to know exactly why. one good sign is that this is really the normal process. and in many ways, what he was saying is the normal rule, if it were any of us, is you go to like, you have a trial, you have sentencing, and then you raise your issues. and that is exactly what he said in his decision, which is this is going to follow the normal processes. it's nice to see the court coming out that way and not treating donald trump, at least in this

amy coney barrett, she was appointed by trump. she'll go along with him. judge roberts. okay. he's another republican. he'll go along to here we go again, a court who's just political. so i think it was a big deal for the rule of law. it's a big deal for respective institutions. it's a big deal for the judiciary, the supreme court, to be independent and to do its job, which is to make rulings on the law devoid of politics. >> so, joey, take us through what we're going to see today. this, of course, set to be virtual. and it seems like trump does have to appear. what are you expecting? >> yeah. so he has indicated that he will appear, you know, as an open question to me whether he would even participate in the proceedings. i think now that the supreme court has weighed in, it certainly gives it more of the impromptu of authority, right, that the court has in new york to conduct this proceeding. so what is this proceeding of which i speak? it's a sentencing. and normally casey, at is sentencing. there's real high drama. you have a prosecutor indicating what they think a sentence

things that they're talking about outside of the other than the fire, is how mad they are at amy coney barretthat you're going to see a lot more attacks on individual judges at the courts, including amy coney barrett, for her rulings to try to pressure her to sort of, you know, to sort of get back in line and line up with trump. and that that, to me is my ultimate takeaway here is that even though, as mollie noted, it's not that monumental. she probably feels it is right now, given how much heat she's getting in the from the right wing megaphone. >> yeah. so to that point, i mean, she she broke ranks. yep. trump knows that. and he is willing to unleash whatever power in the media system against her and make her life probably a living hell in that social space and social media space and the media space. and she's not going to probably be in the same boys club that justice alito and clarence thomas and showered with gifts and what have you. >> here's what thomas should do. he should get his billionaire harlan crow, to give her her own jet and a house and build a house for her and her mom and all

the chief justice in judge amy coney barrett failed to do their job. >> laura: sol and mike, both ofthank you so much. mark zuckerberg reveals the truth about the covid censorship the angle was telling you about all along, next. ♪ has been by your side. ontario, canada, a partner connected by shared history, shared values, and a shared vision for what we can achieve together. stable and secure, when the world around us isn't. you can rely on ontario for energy to power your growing economy and for the critical minerals crucial to new technologies. ontario is your third-largest trading partner and the number one export destination for 17 states. our long-standing economic partnership keeps millions of americans working. in a changing world, it's time to bring jobs back home and build together. more workers, more trade, more prosperity, more security. for generations, this ally to the north has been here. and for generations more, we'll still be here. right by your side. [title: ontario, canada] [title: ontario.ca/partner] [title: paid for by the government of ontario] my name is dana

chief justice john roberts and justice amy coney barrett. they voted with the democratic appointed justices. now this morning, trump's appearance will be virtual. he will not be there, but there will be an audio recording and a forum for trump if he wants to rant. we should note that he is appealing this verdict, but that will not keep it from being rendered today. the sentencing. let's get to the courthouse. cnn's chief legal analyst laura coates, standing by outside laura. >> a day that donald trump thought would never come or perhaps hoped would never come. we remember that it was now, months and months ago, when a jury convicted him of 34 felony counts. he has tried to kick this can down the road, appealing to even the highest court, trying to ensure that he will not convert from a person found guilty to officially a sentenced convicted felon. but here we are in new york city, manhattan, where, frankly, the prosecutor said it all began on this falsified business records case. the catch and kill, prompting the allegations about what has t

amy coney barrett has repeatedly shown destines between herself and donald trump. shown some separation. but especially with coney roberts -- coney barrett and roberts you have some not willing to toe the line. geoff: donald trump wants to make america bigger. he has talked about obtaining greenland from denmark and wants to reclaim the panama canal and wants to turn canada into the 51st state in addition to wanting to rename the gulf of mexico. it is unclear how serious he is. he talked about wanting to take greenland in the first administration. what should we make of this? >> [laughter] look, i'm going to take a page out of rachel maddox's book which is don't listen to what they say but pay attention to what they do. he can talk all sorts of smack about greenland and gulf of america and making canada the 51st state. but, until he actually does something, if he does try to take greenland were rename the gulf of mexico or if he does try to act on these things he is talking about, then i will take him seriously. this is what i learned from the first term, we will dr

are we surprised by amy coney barrett in this or not? justice barrett has been plaguing more and more of aole central role or centrist role of the court. c is often voting with the left of the court. she is sort of carving out her own voice and her own place. i don't want to condemn her for n it. >> it is her prerogative.>> >> she is a very thoughtful jurist. what she did here is consistent what appellateha judges do. they really prefer overwhelmingly to have thesehesh cases completed. they can review the whole case. they hate interlock at torrey appeals and they hate these things coming up and partial form. she is consistent in that regard. >> laura: any time you sayin interlock a dory appeal onth "the laura ingraham" it is timeu to take a pause.st thank you, i got credit for that, thank you so much. >> thank you periods payment confirmation hearings for trump cabinet nominees begin next week and democrats are trying to h derail them. x is reporting chuck schumer is telling hifis party, get this, o create fireworks at ther earrings. he

in a 5-4 decision, chief justice john roberts and justice amy coney barrett sided with the three liberal justices. this decision comes just one day after we learned that justice alito spent time on the phone with donald trump this week, discussing a former alito clerk who is now up for a position in the incoming trump administration. according to nbc news, alito and trump did not discuss trump's request, which had not yet been filed. but the supreme court was not the only conservative bench to deny trump a win tonight. moments after the high extort decision tecame down, the 11th circuit court of appeals handed trump another rebuke, rejecting trump's efforts to block the release of special council jack smith's report on trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election. trump's legal team was attempting to stop the justice department from releasing that report, and it looked initially like they might succeed after a favorable ruling from trump's favorite district judge, aileen cannon. but tonight, again, the conservative 11th circuit ruled that that report can be released and may be released

did. >> what about the delay with the merrick garland appointment and the lightning speed of amy coney barrett? >> that's what either majority would do. if you didn't do that and you are in the majority, you essentially what you fail to do what you expect to do if you're in the majority. >> i think if anyone thought that in november or let's say october the was a death in the supreme court that there wouldn't have been a nomination pushed through the democratic senate here, you are not living the l political reality. i think the real challenge here and the real shame of all of this change even for the down ballot which i s voted for, when you are given a lifetime appointment to someone, they should be moreou scrutiny than a four-year political appointment. and i would tell you that to fix this problem you need to get rid of lifetime appointments for the justices. >> including supreme court? >> i totally agree. i think he should be term limited. i think, no, i do. [applause] and i checked the constitutionality, that's a dubious constitutional. but i would want to advance the argument and i will

. >> dana: what might have been going through the minds of justice amy coney barrett and john roberts't want to join the other conservatives on this decision? >> i think, dana, the problem here for roberts and barrett in particular was the path to the supreme court more than the substantive issue. my own belief is that only the court could do what trump was asking for and needed, which was to extend the principle it announced in its july decision how a sitting president can't be subjected to criminal proceedings. extend that to presidents elect. they are dealing with the same underlying concerns. but the problem is, you don't usually make a bee line right to the supreme court. they like regular order. they like you to go to the district court and second circuit and then you get -- >> dana: in this case isn't it a little unusual? the supreme court has discretion as well to say and yet we understand the timeline here. >> there is an instinctive federal notion that you shouldn't interfere with state criminal proceedings. you are dealing with lawyers -- justice barrett has been not forous

. >> and so that's the reason why you saw amy coney barrett and john roberts decide to join with the liberal side of the scotus bench. there was no consequence. it kind of makes you wonder if there had been the very real threat that he, as in donald trump, would have been looking at even probation, a fine, maybe some community service hours. why don't you put donald trump in fire gear and have him go battle the fire in california like some other inmates are doing in california? but the point is, if there had actually been some threat joy, i don't know if he would have seen john roberts and amy coney barrett side with the liberal court. >> and so, you know, i i'm troubled by the fact that mershone didn't even require donald trump to show up for the sentencing today, didn't even give that little amount. >> donald trump could have been sitting on teams in his pajama bottoms after he came out of the bathroom at mar-a-lago, looking at classified documents. >> nobody knows. but he didn't have to show up like every other defendant needed to do. >> so i appreciate the work from judge mershon

leader mitch mcconnell, and of course, two years later, a very different situation, because amy coney barrett was fast forwarded through four, five, six weeks. mitch mcconnell would have done the same thing, just looking at it, in terms of the institution, let me begin with you senator blunt, your thoughts on how that impacted the politics of the senate and the supreme court? >> in the end of the first two years of the bush administration, i guess once you get to year three, democrats are in control of the senate, senator schumer was not the majority leader, but he led this particular fight, and he announced, there is not a supreme court vacancy yet, but if there is, i'm telling you, we will not fill it until after this presidential election. there is no question both sides would look at those things that way, they are in the majority. if you're in the majority, there is an opportunity to fill a vacancy, they would both try to do that as well. you could argue that changing the rules to where 51 could do that clearly made a difference, but once those rules get changed , they do not get changed

but amy coney barrett may be right that under the circumstances, agreeing essentially with judge merchan, the only way for this to be tested on appeal is to have allowed that sentencing to go forward. otherwise, what would have happened is this would have been put off until 2029, at which point there may never have been an appeal and it may have been dropped. you know, there would have been a political cost, i think, also to the supreme court's reputation, if they had decided to intervene here, they can always intervene later. and the four votes in the dissent suggest that they're going to keep a close eye on this. i think it's in the country's interest to answer your question, that the appeal go forward and that there be a resolution one way or another. and i think he's got a strong argument as many people have recognized, to test the validity of this conviction on on a number of grounds, that defendants in courtrooms all across the country, once there's a conviction, are entitled to challenge on appeal. and he may or may not be successful. but i think that's the only way for the countr

. >> two of the court's conservative justices, chief justice john roberts and justice amy coney barrett, joined the three liberals, making it a 5 to 4 decision. our panel is here, molly ball, cnn legal analyst. no, she is the senior political correspondent at the wall street journal, cnn legal analyst and former federal prosecutor elliot williams is also here. kate bedingfield, cnn political commentator, former biden white house communications director, and brad todd, who's a cnn political commentator and also a republican strategist. welcome to all of you. elliot, were you surprised by this decision? >> yes and no. no. in that it is the right decision legally. now we can set the politics aside, and i'll talk about the legal right. yes. only insofar as nothing has been predictable when it comes to legal matters with respect to donald trump and where the courts are going to go on. so there is an element of surprise to it. legally, it's quite straightforward. in order for donald trump not even, say, donald trump, the defendant, to be able to have his rights as a defendant, to move on with

but, you know, ketanji brown jackson agreeing with amy coney barrett, who's agreeing with elena kagandoes not bode well for tiktok now, just because tiktok goes away on january 19th, as the law requires, i don't think that means it's going away forever. i think that there was enough kind of interest on the supreme court for, for, for different strategies. you know, if chinese owned bytedance divests from tiktok, tiktok can come back as an american owned company. and if it does well, then, well, at that point, tiktok gets all of those free speech rights that me and a lot of other people want to defend, right? so it's kind of like all all they got to do is not do what i told them not to do and they can come back. it's a very mr. blond from reservoir dogs situation for tiktok right now. >> donald trump will be sworn in in the day after tiktok could be banned. he has voiced his objection to the ban. do you think tiktok was also making its arguments to donald trump? and is there anything if we don't get, you know, if trump comes in, is there anything he can do between now and when the cour

the chief justice and justice amy coney barrett, failed to do their job. >> all right. saul. mike, both of you, thank you so much. all right. mark zuckerberg reveals the truth about the covid censorship. the angle was telling you about all along. next. >> are you looking for a walk in tub for you or someone you love? well, look no further. january is national bath safety month, and for a limited time, when you purchase your brand new safe step walk in tub, you'll receive a free safety package. and if you call today, you'll also receive $1,500 off your entire order. yes, $1,500 off the price of your brand new safe step walk in tub. proudly made in tennessee a safe step. walk in tub is the best in its class. the ultra low, easy step helps keep you safe from having to climb over those high walled tubs, allowing you to age gracefully in the home you love. and now you can enjoy the best of both worlds. the therapeutic benefits of a warm, soothing bath that help increase mobility, relieve pain, boost energy, and even improve sleep. or, if you prefer, you can take a refreshing showe

now, both justice elena kagan and amy coney barrett argued that as a foreign company, tiktok doesn't the same free speech rights as a u.s. company, and that the company does have a way forward, a way to remain in business, and that is to comply with the law that was passed by a bipartisan body. the u.s. solicitor general argued the same thing. and i think congress expected we might see something like a game of chicken by dance, saying, we can't do it. china will never let us do it. but when push comes to shove and these restrictions take effect, i think it will fundamentally change the landscape with respect to what bytedance is willing to consider. and it might be just the jolt that congress expected the company would need to actually move forward with the divestiture process. tiktok says that without a ruling that is swift or a delay, it goes dark. on january 29th, they said at the very least, there should be a delay because of the change in administration between january 19th and the 21st, which is the when the ban goes into effect. during the 2.5 hour hearing, it did appear that

and again, amy coney barrett and john roberts joined with the liberals, said, but if there's no harm,there's no harm. and that's really what carried the day here. >> so this news and then right after that, it came down to the effort to keep the special counsel's report away from public view. also trump lost on that. they can still appeal it. we'll see what happens. and we're going to see i'll spoil that one. >> we're going to see those reports eventually okay. >> well we might see you back here tomorrow night elie honig. so thank you for that. up next, of course, we are continuing to keep a close eye on what is happening on the ground in los angeles, fighting these fires from the air was my next guest. former job. now he is a u.s. senator. we're going to talk to him about what he says is needed to prevent future disasters, like the one that so many angelenos are living through right now. >> you don't stop being you just because you turned 65. but you do face more risk from flu and covid. last year alone, those viruses hospitalized nearly 1 million people 65 and older. 1 million vaccin

and again, amy coney barrett and john roberts joined with the liberals, said, but if there's no harm,there's no harm. and that's really what carried the day here. >> so this news and then right after that, it came down to the effort to keep the special counsel's report away from public view. also trump lost on that. they can still appeal it. we'll see what happens. and we're going to see i'll spoil that one. >> we're going to see those reports eventually. >> okay. well we might see you back here tomorrow night elie honig. so thank you for that. up next, of course, we are continuing to keep a close eye on what is happening on the ground in los angeles, fighting these fires from the air was my next guest. former job. now he is a u.s. senator. we're going to talk to him about what he says is needed to prevent future disasters, like the one that so many angelenos are living through right now. >> super man, the christopher reeve story. february 2nd on cnn. >> what's going on? off cameras, off all live cams off. what's going on here? they just took us off the air. get out of my studio turn

it was the three liberal justices and amy coney barrett and chief justice robert who wrote, "first thelleged jury violations that president-elect from state court trial can be addressed in the ordinary course on appeal. second, the burden at sentencing will oppose on the president-elect's abilities is substantial in lht of the trial court stated intent to impose a sentence of unconditional discharge after a brief virtual hearing pair go -- hearing." here is how president-elect trump reacted to the supreme court. president-elect trump: they called for an appeal and it acknowledged about what the judge said about no penalty, and there isn't really penalty, but we will appeal anyway psychologically because frankly it is a disgrace. it is a judge who should not have been on the case. is a highly conflicted judge, and they called for an appeal. i read it and i thought it was a fair decision, so i will do my little thing tomorrow, they can have fun with their political opponent. as you know, i'm under a gag order from a judge. this was an attack of a political opponent, and if you take a loo

chief justice john roberts and justice amy coney barrett joining the three liberal justices rejectingf immunity ten days before the inauguration. trump is expected to appear remotely tomorrow. the judge already signaling he will not impose fines or probation, but the felony conviction will stand. >>> tonight the nation's five living presidents are together to honor the 39th president of the united states, jimmy carter. former president george w. bush playfully greeting barack obama who sat deep in conversation, at times chuckling with president-elect trump. trump briefly shaking hands with his first vice president mike pence. president clinton and secretary clinton were right there as well. there was laughter in the national cathedral has jimmy carter's son jason recalled how carter struggled to learn how to uses his cell phone at first. >> he said, what are you doing? i said, i'm not doing anything, you called me. he said, i didn't call you, i'm taking a picture. >> david: jason carter saying his grandfather was ready to reunite with rosalynn, his beloved wife of 77 years. their fina

it was amy coney barrett yesterday who ruled 5-4. i have to say, the second thing that people should be looking at, that think that every federal judge is going to lay down over the next four years and not do their job, is it wasn't any circuit court yesterday that ruled. it was the 11th circuit. >> that's right. >> the most conservative, i would say, the most conservative circuit court. >> yeah. >> so i think madison lives. there will be checks and balances over the next four years. we can catastrophize, and bad things will happen, but i'm not so sure that federal courts are ready to just roll over. >> yeah. we have reason to hope. we have reason to hope. and to expect, i think, yes, that the judiciary, the court system, as it did during trump term one, will stand up and will interpret and execute the laws as the laws are, not as donald trump would have them be. so we do have reason. you know, let's come out of the cocoon. it might be okay. >> let's just take it day by day, actually. >> who my wife is. >> come on. >> we have reason

supreme court in a 5-4 decision said the process will move forward, including john roberts and amy coney barretty. it was a one-page decision. two, i thought president trump's reaction to that decision was pretty remarkable. i thought he showed incredible restraint, and i think showed the comp confidence of someone o believes all of this will be overturned on appeal's. i'm sure he does not want to be sworn in with this hanging over him, but our process works, and if you believe andy mccarthy, jonathan turley, and some of the other great legal experts, including shannon bream, on our network, so many reversible errors, the president will see this reversed. i thought his restraint was the right kind of restraint. i actually give the judge merchan come i take people what they say. i believe that he is honest. weird way to wish him godspeed, but wish him godspeed. >> jesse: i would reject it, catch it and throw it down and then do something which would cause a pixel is asian on zoom. >> greg: what is the origin of godspeed? >> kayleigh: ask juan merchan. >> harold: is not that other thing you were s

. >> the supreme court last night, justice amy coney barrett, justice john roberts, they did not intervene and stop today from taking place. and i think when we take a step back in american history and look at that decision last night to not intervene, it allowed this process to take place not just for us to all look back at the actual verdict that this jury made and the sentencing, but also the message it sends to donald trump ten days before he is about to go back into the white house, into future presidents of the united states. over those seven weeks, we all listened to testimony from these witnesses inside of that courtroom that testified that donald trump, in the lead up to the 2016 election, attempted to improperly influence the outcome. and he won that election. but then we also heard testimony that while he was in the white house, he, with michael cohen went and falsifying business records. they had a meeting at the oval office in february of 2017, and he went and put his name on checks that served as hush money payment to stormy daniels. and coming off of the supreme court decisi

i think it's very telling that amy coney barrett in the immunity hearing. yeah. homas and the court in some areas. and it was amy coney barrett yesterday who ruled five four on one. and i got to say the second thing that people should be looking at that think that every federal judge is going to lay down over the next four years to not do their job, is it wasn't any circuit court yesterday that ruled it was the 11th circuit. right. which is the most conservative, i would say the most conservative circuit court. so i think madison lives. there will be checks and balances over the next four years. we can catastrophize and bad things will happen. but i'm not so sure that federal courts are ready to just roll over. >> yeah, we have reason to hope. we have reason to hope and to and to expect. i think, yes, that that that the judiciary, the court system, as it did during trump term one will will stand up and will interpret and execute the laws as the laws are and not as donald trump would, would have them be. so we do have reason, you know. that let's, you know, come ou

as we move forward into a second trump term, the chief justice john roberts and amy coney barrett, the two republican appointees who did not vote with the other conservative justices. >> they voted with the majority there. and michael, just what does it mean to be a convicted felon? we say there's no jail term, no probation, but it is a label, correct? >> it's a label. i will tell you that the results of the election make me wonder what the consequences are and the impact of that label. you know, it's not like we're the scarlet letter that we used to talk about, but he's used it almost as a badge of honor to say that he's been shamed and disgraced by this corrupt system. but but it does go. it's he's also concerned about his image. and it does go in the history books that this guy is fixing to now enter his term. he'll have been convicted and sentenced as a convicted felon. you know, certainly there you have to question some countries don't allow convicted felons to come in. and, you know, these things may rear its head at some point. i'm sure people will be making hay about it. um, it

up, of course, by the democratic appointed judges, but also chief justice roberts and justice amy coney barrettave the muscle through the next four years? is the question that i have to stand up to trump, as he surely will seek to commit further abuses, go after his political enemies. >> but it was encouraging in these final hours before he takes office to see accountability. >> and donald trump finally meet. >> and the next part of this, the release of the jack smith report, isn't the accountability in the same sense. in other words, it will have no legal teeth for the moment. there are two issues here. one is that attorney general merrick garland has talked about releasing the part about january 6th, not the part about the about the classified documents. we'll see about that with the 11th circuit court of appeals. but tell me what the consequence of releasing that report are as far as you're concerned, as far as releasing the report. >> you know, transparency is in sunlight are the best disinfectant. and so, you know, for donald trump and all of his cries of witch hunt, i'll tell you, when pe

amy coney barrett, president trump, hearing from your teams. he's co-located with my partner tyler. >> hi. good morning. good morning, mr. branch. good morning, mr. trump. >> good morning. >> although mr. bowie has already alluded to it. just for the record, i want to be clear. that mr. branch is appearing virtually with mr. trump. and you're currently in florida. is that correct? yes, that's correct, your honor. okay. mr. trump's other attorneys are always with us in the court roo. pursuant to this court's decision and order dated january 3rd, 2025, mr. trump was given the option of appearing virtually. and subsequently, counsel for mr. trump informed this court that mr. trump had elected to waive personal appearance and appear virtually positioned. sentence in this matter is permitted in new york, and i direct your attention to the matter of people v vegas 72. miscellaneous third 1133 2021. before turning to the sentencing, i want to confirm that the people and defense counsel have both received copies of the probation report. we have no. tha

ultimately, chief justice john roberts and amy coney barrett joined the court's three liberal justices to deny his request and allow the proceeding proceeding to move forward. however, this is not likely the end of trump's legal battles on this front. on the night of the sentencing, he told reporters at mar-a-lago that he intends to appeal this conviction and he added, quote, this is a long way from finished, end quote. on top of that, his legal team is continuing its attempt to stop the department of justice from releasing the special counsel. jack smith's final report regarding trump's federal cases before the inauguration. earlier in the week, attorney general merrick garland said that he intends to make the public portion of the report related to the january 6th case. but the department of justice has determined that the second part of the report, the part that's related to the classified documents case, likely can't be released because that case is still proceeding against trump's former co-defendants. but neither part of the report can be released yet because of ongoing efforts t

deciding in a 5 to 4 decision a very tight ruling where chief justice john roberts and justice amy coney barrett joined with the so-called liberal justices to say that this could go forward. we knew from the judge it was unlikely that this is going to be a jail imposition or a probation period or a fine. the judge has now had an opportunity to review a probation report, written in connection with interviews from the president elect and the probation officer, who said during the report that it seemed that trump believed he was, quote, above the law. meanwhile, donald trump, the president elect soon to be president in just ten days, is arguing that the indictment itself should never have been brought. the manhattan da, alvin bragg, was wrong to bring this and that. in fact, the american people, according to todd blanche, who will be number two at the doj following his inauguration, has believed that this the american people did not want a case like this to be brought under a category of lawfare. the judge, judge merchan has said, which is the understatement of a lifetime. this has been a truly ext

just with the so-called liberal justices, but also with chief justice roberts and with justice amy coney barrett. that was important to them. and because there were five votes to let the sentencing proceed today, the sentencing proceeded today. >> charles, just your thoughts on unconditional, unconditional discharge being used in felony cases. and then also, you know, at times, trump often talked about the fact that this was a political witch hunt, that there's a political aspect to all of this. he actually mentioned it in his remarks right before he was sentenced. what do you make of all this? >> i'm a former prosecutor. chuck's a former prosecutor. we catherine is a former prosecutor. lisa has been around. the law has been around the law. but as three for three out of four, former prosecutors can tell you, you go with the facts, take you, and you prosecute on the basis of the law. alvin bragg had a job to do. jack smith has had a job to do. that is a different conversation because of how the federal government goes about and their rules with respect to prosecuting, sitting, sitting presidents.

do you think the court will be five four again with justice chief justice roberts and justice amy coney barretting with the liberals? i don't know, actually. >> i read the tea leaves a little differently. what we what we saw last week was four justices who have had no briefing on what happened at that trial, who are already prepared, i think, to toss the conviction out. so the question is whether roberts and barrett could be brought along. >> and that's an open question to me. >> i'm cynical here. i think the only reason they let this whole sentencing go forward is because judge juan merchan signaled early on that he was not going to incarcerate donald trump. that's why i think they let this go forward. and i do think at the end of the day, once this reaches the court again, that i just cannot imagine that conservatives are going to let this, this conviction stand. i think they're going to overturn it. >> do i think it's quite likely? >> and i totally agree with anthony's assessment. i think if there had been any sense that he might be in some actual danger on friday of some sort of punishment,

that included republican appointees chief justice john roberts and amy coney barrett. trump tried to block today's sentencing even though he knew going in, he wasn't going to see a day of jail time or really any penalty whatsoever. he seemed to desperately want to avoid a fate that, for him, was perhaps even worse being forced to listen passively as the prosecution blasted him for his crimes, his lack of remorse, his gangster tactics to evade responsibility. manhattan assistant d.a. joshua steinglass contrasted trump's attacks on the court and the rule of law with the words of the oath of office trump would be taking in ten days. >> instead of preserving, protecting and defending our constitutionally established system of criminal justice, the defendant, the once and future president of the united states, has engaged in a coordinated campaign to undermine its legitimacy. far from expressing any kind of remorse for his criminal conduct, the defendant has purposefully bred disdain for our judicial institutions and the rule of law. and he's done this to serve his own ends

court, in a54 decision, said that the process will move forward, including john roberts and amy coney barretting with the majority. it was a one page, one page decision. two i thought president trump's reaction to that decision was pretty remarkable. i thought it was. he showed incredible restraint and i think showed the confidence of someone who believes that all of this will be overturned on appeal. i'm certain he does not want to go in and be sworn in with this hanging over him. but our process works. and if, if you believe andy mccarthy and believe jonathan turley and some of the other great legal experts, including shannon bream on our network, who say that this is probably something where there are many reversible errors, the president will see this reversed. but again, i thought his restraint was the right kind of restraint. and i actually give the judge. i take people what they say, i hope i believe he's honest. i mean, in a weird way, to wish him godspeed, but he wished him godspeed and i would reject it. >> i would catch it and i would throw it down, and then i would do something wh