howie: joining us now is andy mccarthy, contributing editor at national review and fox news contributor, has most of the press been surprised if not stunned by the trial testimony and the evidence presented that kyle rittenhouse might well have shot these three people in self-defense? >> i think that's right. unfortunately, howie, a trial's not a morality play. it's like a real life concrete dispute and i think we see again and again with a lot of these cases, particularly when there's a lot of political baggage brought to them, people tend to -- the media is the biggest culprit here, the they tend to assign roles to the people who were in the case that fit whatever the political narrative they want to impose on it is and unfortunately for that perspective the four quarters of the trial is a real life dispute. people are not black and white and like characters in a play and the way they react is because of what they confront in a situation and not a political narrative. howie: you know that as a former federal prosecutor. let me play a couple sound bites of the coverage last year after

let's bring in now andy mccarthy a former federal prosecutor and a fox news contributor and jonathan ttorney, fox news contributor. good afternoon to you both. andy, the prosecutor here said in her closing arguments, a reiteration of the case she was building all along, you can't claim self-defense if you're the one that started it. take a listen. >> you can't claim self-defense if you are the unjustified initial aggressor. meaning if you started it. who started it? it wasn't ahmaud arbery. >> this is the crux of the matter from the prosecution's perspective. the jury agreed. you think there was any debate about that? >> no, i don't think so. i think that it's interesting that it's the week after we looked so long and hard at the rittenhouse case where there was so much talk about provocation and here we get the flip side where there was provocation by the person that turned out to be the assailant, travis mcmichael. i thought the prosecutor did a great job on that. i also thought a very interesting thing. at the end of her summation, the last thing that she said to the jury, which is

let's bring in andy mccarthy. , you have been following this very closely what's hang here and the concern? >> bret, there are two very important witnesses to the rosenbaum part of this first shooting. and they were not called to testify and what the prosecutor is saying is when the defense pointed out that the prosecutors have failed to call them that they have a live fifth amendment privilege because they could be charged with arson. and what the prosecutors aren't telling them, evidently, is that one of them doesn't have a live privilege anymore because she had a guilty plea and that's been dispose dollars of. but the other thing i think is important is the prosecutors have the power to immunize people and, thereby, remove their fifth amendment privilege it would mean that they couldn't prosecute them. but if they really wanted their testimony, they could have given them immunity and puts them on the stand. >> bret: andy, you are a former district attorney for the southern district of new york. you have been wat

the former prosecutor, andy mccarthy watching this with us. attorney brian claypool joins us again. r the defense as they get ready to take -- to get in front of the microphone and begin their closing arguments, you think anything that they heard this morning will alter anything about their plan? >> no, martha. i think that they were probably prepared for everything we hear. they're in a better position than on a different day. remember as we discussed earlier in the day, some of the charges got knocked out including misdemeanor gun possession charge. that was a big part of the prosecution's claim that there was provocation here. so they have that advantage. >> one of the things that andy pointed out this morning in wisconsin, they do it differently. the judge gave all of the instructions up front. we watched that play out this morning. we just heard mr. binger say that, you know, he hopes that he will go through them again to the jury because he wants to make sure that they understood what is in the instructions. after the closing argument -- the defense argument, binger, the prosec

andy mccarthy. we'll see whether or not durham is done in the end.y smart man there, right? you have to think about adam schiff and so many others. the "washington post" wrote about the media having a recongress after this. these news outlets face a journalistic challenge. backing up the claims. if the effort does not produce enough evidence there is only one option, retract the stories allowing one version of events to sit awkwardly alongside another and leaving it for the reader to decide won't cut it. >> dana: that's true. i sat next to andy mccarthy during the impeachment trials and watching all of it and learning from him. he knows it very well and zero in on what is the exact thing we're looking at here. as i mentioned yesterday it gets closer and closer to hillary clinton's doorstep. at some point they will have to talk about it. >> bill: about three years ago went down to el salvador with bill barr the a.g. at the time. this was a big interview. the question was you are looking at this stuff and what have you found so far and what questions d

let's bring in andy mccarthy, former u.s. attorney for the district of new york and fox's conservator. and, you been taking service trial. where is this going? >> you can tell by the very fiery and somewhat demagogic arguments that the prosecutors making that it is usually a signal they are worried about the weakness of the case. we heard things in the first hour or so of the prosecutor's statement about how rittenhouse did not belong in the street and he did not have any owner dominic on her. he was out after curfew at all sites at things that he is not charged with in the case. none of those things are crimes or charged as crimes in the case. he referred to rittenhouse a number of times as a murderer which is a provocative work. that's a thing that needs to be proved in a trial. it has not been proved that he has a murder in the sense of wisconsin law. there's a lot of that stuff that is objectionable that has gone on. he told them a big part of rittenhouse's defense is that the conduct of this guy, josh was in in ski who w

attorney and fox news contributor andy mccarthy. you can help a look at the situation from the very moment that we saw it happen and wonder if it could've been been prevented. >> according then -- of course it could have. they could've kept a violent multi-offender in prison and they didn't. it sounds like they had at least three good reasons to keep him in. a pending warranted in nevada in recent charges, sets of charges in milwaukee. one of them, as the report noted, as recently as november 2nd, they had a ton of reasons to keep this guy in. >> sandra: the d.a. now admitting he was on inappropriately low bail. the investigation from the d.a.'s office that made that decision. >> this is really hypocritical. what we ought to be having here now once we can get past the tragic nature of all this is this is the progressive vision of how the criminal justice system is supposed to work. this very d.a. in an interview he gave some years back to the "milwaukee journal sentinel" basically said my philosophy of letting people out, does that

attorney and fox news contributor andy mccarthy. two questions, andy.hauvin trial but not in another way and you understand how wisconsin has a different way of going about things. help us understand what we might see this morning that might be different to what we are used to. >> well, the difference, dana, in procedure for example when i tried cases as a prosecutor in federal court in manhattan, the way the procedure worked is the lawyers would go first in the summations, the government goes first, the defense goes after that and then the government gets to rebut at the end because they have the burden of proof and then the judge would give the legal instructions to the jury and they go off to deliberate. here in wisconsin the judge will instruct the jury on the law first. and the law is kind of complicated here as john points out, there are going to be a number of charges and we were talking this morning how they will allow lesser-included charges in addition to the ones we've been talking about for a couple of weeks and that will take a while and a

andy mccarthy writes with each passing hour it's more likely the case is headed to a mistrial becauseng jury. if that happens, it will very likely be because jurors were intimidated believing that an acquittal even if compelled by the evidence would ignite more of the same violent rioting that led to rittenhouse's fateful confrontation on august 25th 2020. julie, your thoughts. >> first of all the question is did the defendant act in justifiable self-defense? the state has completely botched at the chance of a jury actually coming forward with a ruling, i believe a hung jury is very possible. first of all the judge did not sequester the jurors, that was probably a mistake. i'm not a lawyer, but i would think that you should do that in such a high-profile case. but i think first of all, they're so much evidence on video. the star witness brought by the state was an anti-cop radical who he himself admits that he approached the defendant and was shot pointblank after he aimed a gun that he was illegally carrying. so it's just like -- it should've been in cut and dry open shot case, but i

andy mccarthy, always great to see you. have a great weekend.rmed a beach not far from where some american tourists were on vacation. more from miami, not all is well on the mayan riviera. >> not recently, that is for sure. american and european tourists, men and women from around the world all flocked to mexico's yucatan peninsula. for the sun, the sun, and the idyllic beaches. but a drug gang turf war is never part of the plan. the latest drug gang shooting happened in the cancun area at the all-inclusive luxury hyatt resort, not far from the airport. tourists relaxing on the beach and at the hotel pool, suddenly had to rush inside for safety as the gunfire erupted. men and women still in their bathing suits credit down that crowded into the hotel lobby or barricaded themselves in their hotel rooms. mexican police say it was a planned attack by one drug gang against another, brazenly arriving by boat on the beach, opening fire, and killing two people, presumably in the rival gang. one tourist was also injured after being hit with one of the ri

let's bring in former assistant attorney for new york and fox news contributor andy mccarthy. we will talk about how long the jury will deliberate before rendering a verdict, and with that in mind what are you predicting? >> so it's hard john when we are not getting notes. i always think with these things that if you get a note, even though notes are a little bit, and it this is a very early stage, and the other thing to bear in mind is if you thought the cherry was -- had questions about any particular area of the law and the law is very important in a case like this were the facts are pretty much not in too much of a dispute, did he make the self-defense or didn't he, the jury has in the jury room copies of the charge, the instructions that judge schroeder gave to the jury. so we wouldn't get notes about that and sometimes in a different kind of case he would get a note about, tell me about reasonable doubt again or tell me about self-defense and you aren't going to get that more than likely unless they are confused by something they've gotten from the judge. but they haven'

andy mccarthy, it's always good to have you on. thank you sir. >> thanks, theresa. >> jackie: the white house press briefing is going on and transportation secretary pete buttigieg is joining. >> infrastructure is so elemental to our society that when it's not there to service in the right way all of us are impacted but when it is, when and strong, every community at large and, rural and urban and privileged and marginalized, every community feels the benefit. when combined with the build back better act, the bipartisan infrastructure bill, and collectively like to think of them as the big deal, in answer to the new deal or a square deal before that but they will create a generation of good union jobs and they will make historic investments in equity in the fight against climate change. they make sure that america can compete in the decades ahead. this is a largest investment in the roads and bridges and highways including the largest investment in our bridges ever. so that we can avoid devastating, and that's far too many other pl

>> dana: lying about the dossier. >> andy mccarthy and i used to be federal prosecutors. conspiracy. it doesn't just look bad. you don't take 40 pages to indict someone. you don't identify 10 people including fusion gps. clinton cronies and we investigated russia gate so thoroughly we had never heard of charles dolan. the department of justice and rod rosenstein withheld documents. >> bill: what happens with jake sullivan? >> there was a former national security advisor under president trump convicted while evidence was withheld in michael flynn. now you have a current national security advisor who actually lied and should be convicted and there is no exculpatory evidence and see if the justice department acts. that hypocrisy is what makes americans angry. >> dana: thanks so much for coming in. new developments on the house investigation into the events of january 6. a judgjudge ruling president tr can't block them from seeing certain things. seeking testimony from 10 white house officials former senior advisor stephen miller and former press secretary kayleigh mcenany wh

. >> dana: let's bring in andy mccarthy former assistant u.s. attorney and fox news contributor. you wrote about this on national review about this parade of liberal prosecutors around the country. want to read one thing and have you react. betsy smith, retired police charges who said liberal prosecutors who want to talk about restorative justice and what it means is we're putting the public in dang irrelevant trying to give these people too many opportunities to reoffend. very frustrating for law enforcement and absolutely dangerous for our communities. we no repeatism is a problem in the united states. the rate that people return to prison is 7 and 10 arrested within 5 years. 81% of prisoners released in 2012 were arrested within five years of are he lease and repeatism is a problem and focus on that. these prosecutors seem to be putting the perpetrators ahead of the victims, andy. >> yeah, and it -- it is not to say there is not a place for people in our criminal justice system who have the interest of criminals at heart when we have defense lawyers that are supposed to have t

attorney fox news contributor, andy mccarthy, what is your take on the two verdicts?o the reaction to the verdicts? >> trey, i think they are the right verdicts. i think there is a lot to what you just laid out. in terms of the difference between you on the jury system works and how politics work. how our other institutions work, to me most important distinction is that in a trial and we saw this in the two trials. we don't put 12 experts in the box, we put 12 people with common sense in the box, if they need expert testimony, the idea is they get to hear from an expert who can give them some experience or expertise in a area that is material, but in end we trust common sense of the community to make the decision. it seems in politics, we put the experts in charge, and they sometimes have so much tunnel vision in term of ex expertise they mix the big picture, i don't think that juries do. trey: andy, i fear, i have seen it unfolded over last 5 years. this politicalization of our justice system. if we don't have, that i don't think we have anything, it seems that every

>> andy mccarthy would agree on the front, john duramax indictment of the principal source for the steel dossier, durham has sights set on the clinton campaign, the dossier was generated by the clinton campaign. how does this end? >> part of the process are to include the questioning of mrs. clinton by john durham. last i checked, in terms of congressional testimony the dossier people refused to tell investigators what they told the candidate or the campaign directly. i think she should be asked questions. there is other information out there that there was intelligence that the clinton people and the obama people through the fbi who were also anti-trump made all this up because of the email scandal, she was nervous about the criminal liability and it was a political problem for her as well so what do you do? make up fake allegations against your political opponents which may be fair however unethical in a campaign but when you are using the fbi to spy on your political opponents, obama and clinton you get into crimes and when you are lying to the fbi that is what durham is looking at. i

maria: joining me right now former federal prosecutor andy mccarthy good to see you this morning thanksf the narrative he is right but extravagant extrapolation what durham has done even though i agree everybody running for the hills away from dossier was complete nonsense, and should have been seen as complete nonsense on face when we first learned about it but for the moment, the only thing durham charged anyone with us lying to the fbi. and not even lying about the dossier. so far, the charges he brought are against people who are lying about either who they were working for or who they are sources of information were. so very modest the dossier could be complete nonsense or completely true, and wouldn't affect durham's case one way or the other. >> interesting, you say you know, we sheriff known, that the dossier was garbage i said that from the beginning, i said that i can't see this being true at all just from my interviews with people like devin nunes. >> john rat cliover and over again between 2017, '18, '19 i got trashing media on hell bent idea that trump colluded know matter

andy mccarthy, thank you for joining us and sharing your insights. >> my pleasure, thanks.king-- cracking down on out of control passengers, the f.a.a. says if you're unruly in the skies you'll be the one to face justice on the ground next. - grammarly business helps my company build higher performing sales teams. since simon's team started using grammarly business to sharpen their writing, we've closed more deals. learn more at grammarly.com/business. your kindness outshines your highs and lows. your strength can outlast any bad day. because you are greater than your bipolar i, and you can help take control of your symptoms - and ask about vraylar. some medicines only treat the lows or highs, once-daily vraylar is proven to treat depressive, acute manic, and mixed episodes of bipolar i in adults. full-spectrum relief for all bipolar i symptoms. elderly patients with dementia-related psychosis have an increased risk of death or stroke. call your doctor about unusual changes in behavior or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. re

andy mccarthy ahead with legal analysis.outside the courthouse to let us know what's happening today. >> big day here in kenosha, wisconsin for the high profile case of the kyle rittenhouse trial and tensions running high. we saw protestors gathering outside of the courthouse yesterday. these seats were empty as the jurors were deliberating. the judge dismissed the 7 women and 5 men chosen for the night around 5:00 in what some people saw as a shocking twist kyle rittenhouse pulling these names out of a wooden barrel at random. the family says it was a lot of added pressure but they're confident about the outcome. >> that was pretty difficult for kyle. he mentioned it how strange a feeling it was. he was clearly defending himself. no doubt about that in that -- [inaudible] >> he is on trial for killing two men and shooting three. the jury deciding if kyle rittenhouse was defending himself that night or if he is responsible for provoking the shootings. protestors from both sides at the courthouse an ear shot away from the cou

former federal prosecutor andy mccarthy, a fox news contributor. obviously a lot of anticipation around this durham investigation and frustration it did not go faster. there are so many questions that arise now that there have been three indictments. jonathan turley just touched on something. he said danchenko doesn't strike me as the apex. meaning there is someone higher who they may be heading towards who may be a more central figure pedalling this stuff that turned out to be false about the trump campaign and any connections with russia to throw this election. one. people named and jonathan turley brought it up: who is the former democratic operative now turned pr executive who employed danchenko to work on this project, andy? >> well, we don't know that yet, martha. obviously he's accused of concealing the fact that he got a lot of information that he gave to steele for the dossier. it was from the democratic operative. on the other hand, he apparently made up information from a source that turned out to be false which is this head of the russi

please stand by and andy mccarthy will stand by of standby with us as well. >> he stated and we lookedto mister rittenhouse, previously indicated that you wish to have your ar 15 to protect someone's property. clearly in violation of not only the prior ruling you had made, but the ruling that very day. that very morning. it appears to be that there are too really elements the court wants to consider when making a determination about ms. trial for what amounts two prosecutorial overreaching. the first one is the prosecutor's actions must be intentional in the sense up the culpable state of mind and the nature of awareness that his activity would be prejudicial to the defendant. i would argue to you that that is clearly aware of that. you had warned him, you had told him prior to mr. rittenhouse testifying, you had warned him about the infringement of his constitutional right to remain silent and he did it again. the second one i think requires some action by the court in terms of a finding. the second one says the prosecutor's actions was designed to allow another chance to convict, tha

. >> martha: joining me now, fox news contributor, andy mccarthy. s been in this trial, andy. your thoughts in terms of the instructions and what we expect in closing arguments monday. >> it's been very contentious, martha. it's a shame that i think what most people think they know about the case, a lot of it comes through political prisms rather than a highly wrought factual, emotional scenario that plays out and the facts of the case. what happened today with the jury instructions is pretty standard. it's odd that the judge is still not at the point of making some rulings that the lawyers would want to know before they begin their summations next week. it's standard in murder cases that the judge will instruct the jury on lesser-included offenses. the idea being that a murder is kind of a greater charge and subset within it are lesser charges. the jury will sometimes find that the lesser charges are more easily provable than the greater ones that happens in most cases. i think this case comes down to self-defense. it's not one of those ones where t

andy mccarthy comes out with this, he says "what must be going on behind the scenes that they decidedut a 9:00 p.m. sunday night tweet." he said, you're a journalist, the story was based on more than three dozen aides, three dozen. that's a lot. >> harris: when you lose cnn. [laughs] that's part of a problem. they have got to be in shock that the love inside the tent is not real love. here's the big question i have. why don't we know more about kamala harris' demographics and we do about what she's doing? focusing on the fact that she was a woman of color and that's what he was going to put in the job and we haven't heard him tell specifics about her acumen and her specificity, her goals, her abilities, her skill set, for all the jobs he has given to her, he layers it on. that's not somebody was a great deal of belief in you. they would be selling it as, they are giving it to you, setting you up for a win. i don't know what's going on because i don't have the sources that cnn has or the three dozen that others are talking about. i do have the experience to know that late sunday night

andrew mccarthy joins us now. andy, take us through the deliberations. kyle rittenhouse faces multiple charges, first-degree intentional homicide for shooting two men and wounding a third in kenosha, wisconsin. your expectation for what's happening right now? >> i think we really do have a verdict. when i say that, what i mean is i have been saying all along i thought they were headed toward a mistrial. it's a very straightforward case and they seem to be taking it an extra near lilongwe with time to resolve it. one of the things that i expected to see if i had been right about that would be that they would send a note to the judge saying they had reached an impasse and they didn't think they'd be able to resolve it. if they are telling the judge they have a verdict, that means whatever disagreements i've had they been able to work out. >> john: let's listen to the judge. just give this a moment. all right, it looks like we are still waiting for the jury. read the tea leaves for us vertically when you look at the questions that were asked by the jurors a

author and former federal prosecutor, andy mccarthy, author of "ball of collusion." so it's very interesting. you hear adam schiff there suggest that, you know, if somebody lied, we should check that out and should be investigated. the problem is that the circle that we have that looks like it's being created here and i want to start with you, andy, the person that lied to the guy that wrote the opposition research dossier was connected to the clinton camp. so if he tells the lie to the writer of the dossier, then the dossier somehow finds itself to the fbi, then the fbi leaks the story that they have the dossier to the press and the press starts writing about it everywhere, what you have then is something that may have been based on a lie that then takes on such a life of its own that it turns into a two-year investigation. i just want to remind everybody at the top here, be patient, andy, because james comey, you know, basically said, we have to tell the president about this. you know, this is really bad, this stuff that we're learning in this dossier. i don't know

attorney andy mccarthy joins us now.his morning you were asking the question is rittenhouse headed for a hung jury? what's the answer? >> i think he may be, martha. right now it looks like the deliberations have gone on, on what should be a fairly simple, straight forward case for three days. it is the kind of thing we want to see juries do a thorough, diligent job but there is only so long that you can go on looking at a simple question of was there self-defense or not. we're now in i guess the fourth day of deliberations and in the meantime what we otherwise know is that there are a great deal of outside pressures being exerted on this jury and there is a lot of reason to be concerned that what they are worried about at least some of the jurors are worried about if they return a verdict of acquit all which is what the demonstrators, who became violent on the courthouse steps are saying. if there is an acquittal it will go back to what caused the violence here in the first place. >> bill: with each passing hour it is mo

here is something from our buddy andy mccarthy over at national review. is rittenhouse heading for a hung jury? with each passing hour it's more likely the case is headed for a mistrial because of a hung jury. if that happens it will very likely be because jurors were intimidated believing that an acquittal of rittenhouse would ignite more of the same violent rioting that led to his faithful confrontations august 25th 2020. while demonstrations on the courthouse steps have turned violent. what do you make of it? >> i don't know that i agree with the opinion but i will say that it will be disturbing. when it confronts the defendants right to a fair trial, the judge is been stepping in. judges make sure there is no interaction with jurors, with the protesters that are out there. it's bad enough -- they have to travel in a bus with windows that are blackened out. they understand the repercussions of what is going on here, this case should be about the facts and the law and not the court of public opinion or fear of jurors by voting one way or the other they

andy mccarthy is writing that that mistrial may be coming in the form of some of the examples that brianthe defense would have preferred a verdict yesterday or sometime before the day is out. i do see that they have an ace in the hole that is the motion that the judge's contemplating regarding a mistrial. will it be a mistrial with prejudice or without. i think the defense will want a mistrial with prejudice precluding the prosecution from relitigating this case. i think that in my opinion, with the different murder charges or the two murder charges and the other charge of shooting the other individual, i think this jury is being very deliberate. i think they're very careful. it's naive for anyone to assume they're not aware what is going on. a national case, high profile. they're aware of it. the judge is aware of it. they're doing their due diligence and i hope that they come with a jury decision by friday. if not, i see a mistrial or a hung jury, martha. >> martha: thank you, leo. significant that we haven't heard any specific questions today in terms of self-defense or anything that

and we knew it was going to come eventually it took some time take a listen to jim jordan and andy mccarthy not about these individuals lying to john durham and his investigative team. they are about the original lies they told back in 2016 and 2017 to the fbi that started this charade that was the trump-russia investigation. >> the fbi didn't didn't interview danchenko until february of 2017. well, they were in the fisa court in october of 2016 bringing to the judges there what is supposed to be a verified application which means they are supposed to corroborate the information before they go to court. they didn't do it until much later. >> bret: mollie, here is the national review write up. donald trump might have had a desire to closer relationship with vladimir putin but it was democrats who had aggressively and successfully disseminated russian disinformation during and after the 2016 election manipulating compliant media and law enforcement. no, i do not undermine trust in the american electoral system. we now know that the premise of the narrative that under girded hundreds of storie

so with that, let's bring in andy mccarthy, former federal prosecutor and fox news contributor. andy, we have heard a statement from mr. binger and we heard from mark richards outside the courthouse. your thoughts on the reactions that we've seen from the two attorneys, the prosecutor and the defendant. >> martha, i salute them for striking the right tone. a lot of things that mr. binger has done that we talked about the last few weeks in a critical way. this is a message that sends exactly the right note. they respect the verdict and they ask people to express themselves in a civilized manner, which is exactly the right tone. you heard from the defense lawyer who, he wasn't in a celebratory frame of mind obviously. there's relief, and i hope that kyle rittenhouse takes his lawyers very good advice, which is, you know, don't be too notorious. go be a kid. go live your life. resist the urge to turn this in to a spotlight. because one of the things i think you see here is there's a big juxtaposition between the drama that goes in to the trial and what we all expect to get out of it

i do want to go back right now to andy mccarthy on this ongoing situation here in the arbery case. the role of some people who are sitting in that room, including the reverend jesse jackson. the defense said their presence was pressuring and giving the appearance of a lopsided, unfair courtroom. they wanted a mistrial declared because of that. i'm oversimplifying it here. the judge quickly dismissed that. what do you make of where this stands right now, andy? >> neil, i think that these defendants are very likely to be convicted so they're trying to make a record of things that they'll be able to raise on appeal. one of the things they'll want to say is there was an atmosphere of intimidation in the courtroom. in this country, you're allowed to attend a trial. if jesse jackson wants to go to the trial, he can go to the trial. if he's going to the trial to make a statement, i would respectfully suggest to him that, you know, the outcome that he wants would be easier to get and more secure if maybe he wasn't such a presence in the courtroom. but he has every right to be there. i woul

let's bring in andy mccarthy, former federal prosecutor and fox news contributor who has been our go-to as we have followed this throughout the course of the trial. mercedes colwin joining us and a fox news legal analyst who you know as well. thanks to both of you. good to have you here today. so andy, if i may start with you. your thoughts on what the jury has asked for. there was talk about a drone video. turns out it's something different that they're interested in. get us up to speed. >> if there was one factual thing in this case is who was the aggressor when it comes to kyle rittenhouse and joseph rosenbaum, the first person that was shot and killed. the defense has argued from the beginning, i thought they've had the better of the argument on this, that rittenhouse was fleeing away. he was not the assailant and it was rosenbaum who was the aggressor when the shooting happened. the prosecutors have used some video evidence including some that was interjected at the end, which the defense says is distorted to suggest that it was rittenhouse that was the aggressor, not rosenbaum. i

i asked andy mccarthy, it's a fool's errand to predict what the jury will do.s. i don't think in terms of timing you can really know. >> sandra: we were waiting for that msnbc statement. they just released. that the judge making it very clear this is a serious incident they identified. they brought up last hour. asked whether or not he will consider tv cameras in the courtroom again. >> john: and msnbc booted from the courtroom for the rest of the trial. another case gripping the nation in georgia. the man who shot and killed ahmaud arbery back on the witness stand. prosecutors got their chance to question him today. steve is live in georgia with this gripping testimony. >> that's right. john, the crowd outside of the courthouse got bigger each day. we are witnessing the start of a march through town. several hundred black pastors. there were complaints with a defense attorney about black pastors inside the courtroom. a remark the judge said was reprehensible. the response is a huge increase in the number of black pastors many coming from atlanta. travis mcmich

. >> sandra: live in kenosha for us as the breaking news continues, andy mccarthy joins us as the former assistant attorney and fox news could jupiter. great to see. see you. as far as the question that bruce schroeder received from the jury reviewing some of the video evidence in the case, how unusual is this and what did you make of the way that he responded saying if they want to watch it hundreds of times, that should be fine with him. >> in a trial to sandra, especially the old days when physical exhibits were mainly documents and it still photographs, you would just send them back to the jury and they could look at them or not look at them and pour over them as much as they wanted to. video is different, obviously, because there is a process that has to take place in order for them to view it. for whatever reason, they don't have them equipped in the jury room to play the videos themselves. this is substance of importance and why do they want to see this video? the other part is ministerial which is along the lines of how are they going to watch it and how may so they get to watch

. >> dana: i would like to ask you something that andy mccarthy wrote and there was an attempt almostare operating. there's a lot of things there i could not imagine would well with the jury. at one point, the prosecutors seem to be saying that someone in a mob told you not to get off the property so why did you not obey them type of argument. you could challenge whether rittenhouse was there to give aid, but to say that he should not have given a because someone in the mob told him not to is rather bizarre. and at another point, the prosecutor stomach prosecution mocked rittenhouse by saying they were throwing stones at a . it wasn't we do hurt the vehicle, was it? it's this odd narrative that they are trying to flail and find a way to score with rittenhouse. >> bill: interesting. professor, thank you for hanging around with us. we will check back in with you. a biotech entrepreneur and law school. welcome to our coverage and how you view the trials of our question marks become that case should be judge on the facts and nothing else. there's a lot of people that might not like kyle r

andy mccarthy, our colleague here at fox has an interesting take on that in which he said, the prosecutors know that they have no case and they need this misdemeanor to distort reality such that they will be able to hoodwink the jury. under wisconsin law if a person engages in unlawful conduct, that person can lose his right of self-defense which of course rittenhouse is claiming and that is why prosecutors are desperate to keep the misdemeanor gun possession count in this case. do you believe, as andy seems to come up with the prosecution's case hinges on this idea that rittenhouse illegally possessed a weapon at the time, wisconsin law is muddy, therefore he is not eligible to the self-defense defense. >> and he is always very insightful on these issues and where i trained as a criminal defense attorney comes from a long and distinguished prosecution career. i don't think that's going to work quite frankly. there is another explanation. they'd be happy to get anything at this point. if you come out with a misdemeanor, it's all conviction. as i noted earlier, they seem to have reduced the

the governor and wisconsin and to andy mccarthy, is this common where the defendant draw numbers fromis the wisconsin -- >> bill: go ahead. >> this is the wisconsin practice. so to compare in federal court what would happen would be if you took 18, which you don't do in every case, but in the longe case, if you are afraid of losing jurors come if you take 18 come if during the trial you lose one of the 12, the first world war picked pick their tea to beat the jury in the last si of the alternates. if you lose a juror during the trail, the alternates replace the jurors from the lowest number to the highest number, the first one picked the last one packed. >> bill: i get all that. it just seems very unique. >> but understand that rittenhouse doesn't know who he is picking. they put those names and the tumbler. he is picking up numbers. the numbers don't relate as far as he is concerned to named jurors, so it is like a lottery. he doesn't really know which si are coming out. >> governor walker, you are going to say something crack. >> i've been in a jury trouble for in a civil case, and

this is the top story where everything going on in the world and includes editorial by andy mccarthy.e a book about it called ball of collusion and he just sums it up as you just did. john durham's charging instruments suggest the clinton campaign used its agent to peddle the trump-russia rumors to the government and the media. then they used the fact that president trump was being investigated as part of its campaign messaging. this is one of the biggest political scandals in u.s. history. the question is where does john durham go from here. would there be more indictments? there sure hell should be. maria: more likely that there will be. nancy tengler you have been here and unfortunately this whole thing was successful in getting half of america to actually believe that there was some collusion going on with russia and donald trump. that's unfortunate and it is on the democrats that really have yet to come clean on all of this including like i said adam schiff and jerry nadler. >> yeah, well, maria, where is your pulitzer? i find this shocking that you have a lawyer for the clinton

. >> andy mccarthy, there could be a hung jury, there was a chance of that, the "national review" thisrn time, does it go into weekends, roughly 7 hours of deliberation yesterday, total deliberation 23 hours, wasn't that long of a time yet. not like deliberating for this bigger case for that long. stuart: you will be dealing with that this afternoon and dealing with this as well. the story from austria, they will become the first country in europe that made vaccines mandatory for all residents in the first country in europe to go back to national lockdown, mandatory vaccinations for every one. what is your take on that? >> 55% of the population is fully vaccinated. there have another spike in cases. to reenter lockdown since the spring causes ripple effect concerns that there is more lockdowns. i it has been brutal. stuart: a vaccine mandate. >> 55% -- stuart: no one else has done that. no other country, certainly not democracy in western europe, none have said you got to get vaccinated. you've got to. >> reporting 10,000 new cases over the last 7 days and they are seeing a serious spi

get a jury verdict in the arbery case, while the fall out continues to infuriate the country, andy mccarthyoads and airports pack your patience as america gets ready to celebrate thanksgiving. see you at 9:00. ♪ ♪ learning is hard work. hard work requires character. learning begins in faith. it must move upwards toward the highest thing, unseen at the beginning - god. and freedom is essential to learning. its principles must be studied and defended. learning, character, faith, and freedom: these are the inseparable purposes of hillsdale college. with xfinity home, you can keep your home learni and everything in it faith, a more protected. i can wrangle all my deliveries. thanks, hoss! and i help walk the dog from wherever. *door unlocks* ♪ ♪ well, i can bust curfew-breakers in an instant. well, you all have xfinity home, with cameras to home security monitored by the pros. *laughs* learn more about home security or get our self-monitored solution starting at just $10 per month. steve: from sweet moments to hilarious, the noisy bradshaw bunch, the tv show, is showing legend terry bradshaw an

i worked with leader mccarthy, even andy briggs on legislation, and i remember when i went to orientationse in the antebellum south in the 1850s when they used to cane people in congress, so i'm hopeful and optimistic about our democracy functioning. i still believe we're the greatest democracy in the world but we just need more americans saying, no violence. that's where we draw the line. >> an important message. congressman ro khanna, thanks for your time. >> thank you. happy thanksgiving, jim, and to all the folks listening. >> and you as well. >>> coming up, we'll bring you an exclusive look inside the, korean defense forces patrolling the border with russia as tensions between the two countries threaten to boil over. ♪ the one desire ♪ ♪ you are, you are, ♪ ♪ don't wanna hear you say... ♪ ♪ ♪ i want it that way ♪ >>> as americans head into the thanksgiving holiday, the covid pandemic here in the u.s. is taking a turn for the worse. cases are on the rise in 26 states with hospitalizations trending up as well. for more on that i'm joined by dr. zeke emanuel, the author of "which countr

attorney columnist and fox news conservator, mccarthy, welcome back, andy. >> how are you?, good. obviously watching this great interest as many people are, there are a lot of opinions about this but what does it mean to you the jury asked for this specific instruction they did from the judge, first the part about self-defense and defense the rest of it. >> i think the idea was they would send one copy of the instructions back to the deliberation room and the instructions are like 40 pages long so they wanted copies for everyone or at least -- i think that's what they wanted. what ends up meaning for us as a practical matter, it's one of these unusual trials where there's not much dispute factually about what happened so it comes down to a legal question about whether there is a self-defense defense or not. trial jury waters, usually the way we know what they are focusing on at least we think we do is because they sent notes asking testimony on this, law on that but if this is mainly a legal thing and they have instructions, i'm not surprised we went the whole day without g

mccarthy and ted williams. gentlemen, welcome. >> thanks, mike. >> mike: andy, 23 of 27 charges convicting these three men that's a whole lot of charges for a jury that doesn't do this for a living. how do the prosecutors stack those charges, arrange them in order to get those serious results? it's interesting, the last thing that the prosecutor said, and i think this turns out to have been a brilliant strategy on her part, was that the jury should work from the bottom. that is at the bottom of the indictment you had the felonies that were the predicates for the felony murder charges. there were four of those. so there were four underlying felonies. there were two aggravated assaults and two false imprisonment charges. from there you work -- if you convict on those, it's very seizey to convict on the felony murder. and then by the time you get to the big count, which was the malice murder, that they convicted the actual shooter, on travis mcmichael, number one, you already have convicted people of murder. and you have built momentum toward the end. and i think when you look at what the jury did hear, they really

mccarthy out with a new statement just moments ago. i'm going to read it for you. >>> in a moment, i'm going to talk to congressman andy levin about theosphere on capitol hill as well as the build back better bill to be taken up by the senate on monday. a big smile there likely because of the michigan win moments ago as well. >>> plus i'm going to talk to one writer who believes that what president biden needs more than a build back better victory, an enemy. and molly jong fast has ideas of who or what that enemy should be. >>> we're looking to a monumental showdown in the supreme court just days from now, the future of roe v. wade hanging in the balance. that is coming up later on in the hour. >>> we want to begin, though, with the latest examples of the republican party's continued shift towards extremism. republican congresswoman lauren boebert garnering massive backlash after video surfaced of her at a campaign event suggesting that fellow congresswoman ilhan omar was mistaken for a terrorist. we want to warn you. the comments are inflammatory. but i think it's important for you to hear it. and hear her own hateful words. >> and h

mccarthy out with a new statement just moments ago. i'm going to read it for you. >>> in a moment, i'm going to talk to congressman andy