um, so this is for the appellant or appellants. counsel either could answer, uh, i would like to narrow down on, uh, what's being discussed at least, or i want to get a response that's specific here. so when this appeal, uh, are you contending that the department made either a factual error in any of its work, any of the issuing of the notices, or are you contending that there was a error in the application of the building code by the department? and if so, what is the basis for those contentions of error? there were it's tom tunney, uh, counsel for property owner. uh there were a number of items listed in the notice of violation, right, right. um, many of them, we agree, need to be addressed or abated that they that they could be violations ones. um they, they they and they can be brought into compliance. um, some of them we think are there's a misunderstanding of which floor, say the stair is on and we think they're looking at a different stairway that could be clarified. um all of all of them can be addressed. just we don't thin

the most willing to take the position in the appellate general. judges - 912, the smallest in the appellate83. the assembly of judges of the civil court of cassation of the supreme court was elected to the great chamber judges olga stupak and serhiy pogribny for a period of 3 years. according to the estimates of the foundation's experts, the appointed judges are dishonest. according to the conclusion of the public integrity council , the property of olga stupak's family does not correspond to income. also, the judge allegedly deliberately understated in the declaration. the cost of the purchased property. olha stupak assured that she purchased 10 acres of land in kyiv for 149,000 uah, and her svykrusa managed to buy a new house with an area of ​​380 m2 and 13 acres of land near kyiv for almost three times less than the market value. from the conclusion of the public council virtue in particular, unconfirmed sources of income for the acquisition by the candidate of a 380 m2 house and land. plots of 0.13 hectares under it, which are located in the village of stoyanka, kyiv-sviatoshyn district

with the appellate body.w, members begun using other alternatives much more. we have had several panel reports, 12 or3, i think 11 have been accepted without even going to the appellate body. there are several■q disputes in which members are trying to talk to each other to mediate. china and australia, for instance, that went to the dispute settlement s talking to. through mediation and direct dialogue, they are settling their issues. dispute settlement system in full, with all the mechanisms. there is another interim arbitration system that's been started by the e.u. and several other members that belong to it an alternative. so we now have several avenues an instruments that can be used. we should use all of"t those, as well as a reformed appellate body and dispute settlement system. let's not kill i i do think it s a great point. when the appellate body problems legitimate concern that i held as well that it would totally shut down the system but it's been good to see panels continue consultations, getting

their argument is basically that you can only have appellate jurisdiction and a locker tory appellatewe were so aren't lawyers, that means jurisdiction to hear claims of ever that are committed, to correct those errors before this a final judgment of conviction. there are strict rules against interlocutory appeals in the federal accords, and the argument there is there isn't sufficiently clear statement in the statue or constitution that there is an immunity for the president that there should be no appellate jurisdiction. i don't think that's argument at the end of the day is going to prevail. i think at the end of the day, but either going to say they say there's no jurisdiction, the courts also going to say, the alternative, there is no claim. and i think at the end of the day, the questions emerge. i mean, there really is no presidential criminal immunity of the sort donald trump is seeking here, and as a result, you can argue there also is no right to appeal. >> i think clyde is agreeing with you as you speak to us right now. george, let's shift gears and talk about a case that a

route to the dispute settlement mechanism with the appellate body. think that's also not right. i think that now members have gup begun using some of the other alternatives much more. and we've had reports, 12 or 13, i think that 11 have been accepted, without even going to the appellate body. there are several disputes in which members are trying to talk to each other to mediate and you see china and australia, for instance. >> right. >> that went to the dispute settlement system and then they're talking to each other and through mediation and through director, they're settling their issues so we should use the dispute settlement system in full with all the mechanisms. the europeans have also, there's another deterrent arbitration system selected by eu and others who belong to it as an alternative so we do now have several avenues and instruments and we should use all of those plus a reformed appellate body and dispute settlement system. so, that's my answer. >> let's not kill it. >> and i understand it, i think it's a great point. you know, when th

there is a high probability that certain appellate judges will be suspended.w did judicial reform progress in ukraine last year? we have a chance to choose normal judges of the constitutional court. congratulations, that's it judicial control and i, tetyana shostrova. we received the status of a candidate country for joining the eu, but. subject to the fulfillment of the so-called seven steps, the criteria defined by the european commission, among which are anti-oligarchic reform, the fight against corruption, changes in the laws on national minorities and... and one of the key points is the implementation of judicial reform. and over the past year, ukraine has managed a lot. today we will tell you how far this reform has moved. but first to the news. the courts of appeal of ukraine lack half of the judges. from 1350 700 positions are vacant. in the last 10 years , not a single judge has come there. this affects the terms of consideration of cases. and their quality, there is a high probability of stopping the work of certain appellate courts, so currently onl

written by the appellate review. this case was motivated to hurt president trump's chances to win the election in 2024. you have an attorney general who campaigned back in 2017, 2018. she was out to get trump. those are facts. she has a motivation to go after trump. this statute has never been applied like this before. there are no victims. so and then to show you the hostility toward -- by this judge, president trump's team wanted a bereavement leave because his mother-in-law passed away. the judge denied it. i've been a lawyer for 30 years. that's an automatic grant. you grant that. he said no because of a tight schedule. what's the tight schedule? this case has been going on for months. i would submit to you this case will be appealed. the final chapter hasn't been written that but anyone who does not believe this case was politically motivated is in denial, harris. >> harris: i have had viewers ask me and pass on because i say if i get to see leo terrell i'll ask him to a legal genius now, what is the point of ba

appellate court judges are not allowed to create law. what they do is they interpret law, and there are only three sources of law where one could look to find this notion of absolute immunity for a president who commits crimes while in office to unlawfully retain the power of the presidency. there are federal statutes on the books, appellate case law, legal precedent, and there's the constitution. you can look long and hard at those three sources of law. there is no federal statute. there is no appellate court opinion, no pres dependent, and there is no constitutional provision that says a sitting president can commit any and all crimes with absolute immunity against prosecution. so the appellate court judges will not be able to conjure up presidential immunity out of whole cloth. that actually runs contrary to the job and responsibilities of appellate court judges. they are to interpret law that exists. that's why i say i think there is absolutely no chance this three-judge panel will conjure up out of thin air this doctrine of presiden

there is a high probability that certain appellate judges will be suspended. yes, currently only four judges work in the sumy court of appeal. imagine, but this is both a criminal and a civil chamber. taking into account the fact that in appeal courts, cases are heard as part of a collegium, that is, by three judges. each chamber has two judges. in fact, the board. it is impossible, and they involve the criminal chamber, civil, civil, criminal, so-and-so, how long they will last, let's say, it is unknown, in this state and in this mode of operation. only 13 judges work in the kharkiv court of appeal out of 60 positions by state. in the largest kyiv court of appeals, out of 145 judges by staff, 70 are missing. the higher qualification commission of judges plans to start interviews with candidates for vacant positions of judges. in the appellate courts next fall. the competition has already started for 550 vacant positions judges, more than 200 candidates apply. the largest number of applicants for a position in the general court of appeals is 912. the least in

the three-judge appellant panel facing this big question -- can the former president be held criminally responsible for actions that he took while in office to overturn the 2020 election loss. >> we heard a remarkable argument from trump's team who heard the argument that prosecuting a former president would open up a pandora's box as john sauer said that working in the capacity as alleged in the indictment by jack smith, the special counsel's office pushing back on that. >> this notion that we are all of the sudden going to be seeing a floodgate, i think that, again, the careful investigations in the clinton era didn't result in any charges. the fact that this investigation did doesn't reflect that we are going to see a sea change of vindictive tit-for-tat prosecutions in the future. i think it reflects fundamentally unprecedented nature of the criminal charges here. >> cnn's evan perez joins us now. evan, you were inside of that courtroom, and i have to understand what were your key takeaways and what was the climate like in the actual atmosphere in that room. what did you see? >> wel

and then the uh, the, the appellant, how long then the appellant can come back and apply for a permit for the deck? i mean, they have the permit in now. now that includes the deck and the spiral stair. um right. but if we deny the if we deny the appeal, then the, the chalkboard is erased. correct. there's nothing on the table. yeah. if you deny the appeal, then they don't have authorization to do the, um, any of the work that triggers the variance. and including the deck, because that has the conditions of approval for prior from the board of appeals. okay and this is kind of getting down the road, i think commissioner eppler was saying then they could still apply for that deck through their permit, which would be denied. and they kind of have another bite. so then apple, but at the same time that would be appealed by the property owners and not by the yeah, right. so my question is, so first, if, if we if we deny the appeal the, the it's the chalkboard is washed clean. it's done. correct. at this point that's a yes or no for the variance. yes for the variance. yes. right at that poin

we know the appellate courts in new york, the appellate division has had some questions about just those remedies. how far can this judge go? they've stayed some of the most severe remedies. it is not a fast appellate process in new york. there's two level of appeals. it could take years before we get a final answer. and potentially the judge could rule the trump organization and trump personally and the sons could no longer do business in new york. >> potentially. and he's already signaled some direction towards that with his initial ruling on partial summary judgment. but raising questions today about the sons. >> yeah, for trump this is obviously very, very sensitive indeed. kristen, trump gave some remarks after leaving the court in new york where you are and you had a chance to ask him a key question. tell us about that. >> wolf, this was about a separate case. a reminder trump went down to the federal court in d.c. to listen to his legal team really argue his immunity claim. and a hypothetical a judge brought up to his lawyer essentially was if donald trump or if a president ordere

there is a high probability that certain appellate courts will be suspended.but somehow the year progressed judicial reform in ukraine? we have a chance to choose normal judges of the constitutional court. greetings, this is court control and i am tatiana shostrova. we received the status of a candidate country for joining the eu. but on the condition of fulfilling the so -called seven steps. the fight against corruption, changes in the laws on national minorities and the media, and one of the key points is judicial reform. and over the past year, ukraine has managed a lot. today we will tell you how far this reform has moved, but first to the news. the appeal courts of ukraine lack half of the judges. and 700 out of 1,350 positions vacant in the last 10 years , not a single judge has come there. this affects the terms of consideration of cases and their quality. there is a high probability that certain appellate judges will be suspended. yes, currently only four judges work in the sumy court of appeal. imagine, but this is both a criminal and a civil chamber.

you are right, jonathan, appearing at an appellate court 's unusual.nse doesn't show up for this appellate court argument. he's making the most opportunity. this is a proceeding that's going to be heavily covered and he will be there in the front row apparently, and he will be heavily watched. and he will be watching the three judges of the d.c. circuit as they hear the arguments on both sides of this contentious issue. >> and so, i mean -- does trump stand a chance in hell of his presidential immunity argument, actually winning over the d.c. court of appeals? >> there is a really important point. it doesn't have to prevail on these arguments to get a tactical victory here. the fact that the supreme court rejected jack smith's request to take this up without first going to the appellate court means that donald trump has gotten some time on the clock. they have to go to the d.c. circuit. they have got to hear these cases. tanya chutkan, the judge below, did not really go into details about whether or not the conduct that has been complained over part of

i suspect what the appellate judges will do with that, lawrence, is they will probably deal with that argument about whether they have jurisdiction or not, whether this interlocutory appeal was appropriately filed in the first place. and even if they find that it was not appropriately filed, and they don't have really jurisdiction at this point, i suspect they will do a legal belt and suspenders. they will resolve the jurisdictional ill issue, but they will also go on to resolve the underlying issue of presidential immunity. i'm pretty sure they will reject that. but the reason they will go with that belt and suspenders approach is i don't think they want this case sort of ping-ponging back and forth between the trial court and the appellate court. resolve all of the issues now, and then hopefully get this case moving forward. and i ultimately believe, lawrence, that if the supreme court is an honest broker of the law, and the word if is doing some heavy lifting in that sentence. once the appellate court rejects presidential immunity, which i think they will, i don't think the supreme

they know most of these trials are going to be overturned at the appellate level. they just want to drag this on to maksure he does not get elected again. as far as jack smith, jack smith, the high percentage of his cases are overturned because of things that he did during trial that were questionable. i want to know why there a double standd. host: we will take up those questions. guest: there is a lot there. i will try to keep my thoughts stight. taking the argument that it is an attempt to get him out of there. every indication so far is anecdotal, but these appearances and the mugshot of donald trump have been campaigned in the polls. that is the intent to impact trump politically with a boom impact for donald trump. the classified documents investigation -- that is still under investigation. by a different council that used to be the u.s. attorney in the district of maryland. that case is not closed. a judge was going to have him or not have him because it is still ongoing. it is a special counsel who decis it. he questions jack smith's accessories and a hi pe

it is unusual to attend an p appellate oral argument. but really in addition to the larger constitutional questions being litigated today, the big strategy is to at least get the election subversion case, the trial supposed to start here in a few weeks delayed. so in terms of winning on the merits, trump's team has said they are not sure can he win on the constitutional question, but if he can continue to get the case delayed, that in and of itself is a win for him. >> paula reid in washington, thank you. >>> and i just think what we were talking about this morning, the fact that -- paula makes a great point. it is not necessarily the outcome that matters to trump, but it is something that has never been asked or answered before, this question. >> and in a way it is a good thing. we don't want every year the question is can this president commit this crime and be immune. but the fact that we're in a kind of wild, wild west where we'll have a court of appeals decide a question about whether we've got absolute immunity for a president of t

>> you know, that's a really good question and appellate court looked at this question as the crumbleysied to get the indictment against them dismissed and the appellate court said we are not too coconcerned thisis will set a precedent for the future that says all parents in all situations will be held accountable for the intentional actions of their children. they said this case was so egregious and that the evidence so overwhelming that they could finds that this case could proceed to trial without setting a precedent for every subsequent case where a child may engage in some kind of crimiminal behavio so i think in the eyeyes of the appellate case this is a very narrow case baseed on a very specific set of facts. >> riva martin always great to have you on the program. we appreciate you staying up late there in los angeles. thank you. >> thank. >> still to come on "cnn newsroom" the british plan to share precious artifacts with the land where they came from, the calls fofor mumuseums to re looted treasure. >> welcome back. museums across the u.s. are changing or closing exhibits with

um, so this is for the appellant or appellants. counsel either could answer, uh, i would like to narrow down on, uh, what's being discussed at least, or i want to get a response that's specific here. so when this appeal, uh, are you contending that the department made either a factual error in any of its work, any of the issuing of the notices, or are you contending that there was a error in the application of the building code by the department? and if so, what is the basis for those contentions of error? there were it's tom tunney, uh, counsel for property owner. uh there were a number of items listed in the notice of violation, right, right. um, many of them, we agree, need to be addressed or abated that they that they could be violations ones. um they, they they and they can be brought into compliance. um, some of them we think are there's a misunderstanding of which floor, say the stair is on and we think they're looking at a different stairway that could be clarified. um all of all of them can be addressed. just we don't thin

the real question here is one of timing and how quickly the appellate courts will move this appeal sotrial. >> when you say that, his arguments are weak and grasping, tell us in your view where we're seeing that the most. >> right. so this is the essence of trump's argument. he says i'm like a king. i'm absolutely immune. there's nothing wrong that i can do that you can hold me accountable for while i'm president. and the special counsel comes back with some very powerful examples. they say, for instance, if the court were to accept trump's view, he would be able to order the national guard to assassinate his enemies. he couldn't be prosecuted. he could sell nuclear secrets. he couldn't be prosecuted, and they point out how ridiculous the position he takes is. at its ultimate expression it would let president biden do anything he chose to do to stay in power. this really isn't a tenable argument. it's one the courts will reject. >> the other side of this here when it comes to another legal fight, what do you make of the reports that trump's legal team could file their appeal this week

these are historic charges and historic appellate argument. so this d.c. circuit, which is going to be appealed regardless of the outcome to the full supreme court, has to deal with the impeachment and acquittal by the senate. that's a major issue. all these other hype that calls never before has a sitting former president faced charges regarding his duties as a sitting president but has gone through the impeachment process, harris. this is historic. this court is going to have to make a very tough decision. >> harris: former president trump is also facing more than one dozen ballot challenges based on this case. republican senator deb fischer with this on the biden administration's being tongue tied on the topic. whenever political machines are interfering in elections american administrations have spoken out against those abuses. the biden administration is no exception. the authoritarian urge to ban an opposition candidate from standing for election has manifested at home. the biden administration has been largely silent. not tongue tied, just silent. >

that sits until the appellate process goes through, big stripe of fairness. no matter how hungry people may be on the prosecutorial side of this, they have shown their stripes, like leticia james, ultimate stripe is red, white and blue and you get fairness before the courts and that will happen with appeal. >> emily: jill biden says the president is aging backward. benjamin buttons. stay with us. ♪ introducing ned's plaque psoriasis. he thinks his flaky, red patches are all people see. otezla is the #1 prescribed pill to treat plaque psoriasis. it can help you get clearer skin. don't use otezla if you're allergic to it. serious allergic reactions can happen. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. some people taking otezla had depression, suicidal thoughts, or weight loss. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. live in the moment. ask your doctor about otezla. >> kayleigh: first lady jill biden is standing up for her husband. in a new interview, jill says they are looking at his age all wrong. >> my husband is 81. end of seco

that is when appellate courts may reduce it on appeal. 45 times? that is right in the heartland of what punitive damages usually are. >> donald trump has said, on social media, he is going to appeal. let's take a listen to his attorney, lena habba, after the verdict last night. rney>>> the behavior i saw in t, some of which was reported widely today, gave us the most perfect record on appeal, even if i needed it, which i don't, we were stripped of every defense. every single defense before we walked in there. i am proud to stand with president trump. he showed up, he stood up, he took the stand and he faced this judge. you know what? i will continue to do so with him. >> does she have a case on appeal? >> no surprise that that would be what she would go for an appeal. in other words, she's gonna argue to the appellate court that i was not allowed to put on my case. i was too limited by the judge in the evidence i couldn't use in the avenues that could pursue on both direct and cross-examination. most notably, i expect would argue, look, donald trum

uh, speaking in support of the appellants. uh, i think the planning department's position, um, on the housing accountability act does not make a ton of sense. this seems like a pretty blatant violation of the housing accountability act from where i stand. see, looking at the 2021 permit, um, the planning commission imposed conditions on the on the permit and referenced old findings, old conditions that were put on a different project. um, and the planning department is now saying that these new conditions have the same force of planning code. but this frankly, is an out and out violation of the housing accountability act, which says that, uh, objective standards must be knowable to both the, uh, the project sponsor and the department at, at, you know, when the project is filed, the project sponsor would have no idea what the planning commission would say at a discretionary review hearing, because because by its very nature, it is discretionary. the planning commission couldn't make whatever findings or set whatever conditions

sometimes when you watch an appellate argument you can't predict. the judges are stone faced and you can't tell from their questions. this was very apparent. there's no way they're going to reverse. the only question here is whether for some reason they decide they don't have the jurisdiction to decide this now and it should be decided after the trial is over. but i don't think they're going to go that way. they're considering it. it's clear to me, particularly judge henderson, is considering that. she needs two votes, of course. i don't see that happening. >> we heard trump's attorney making the argument, john sauer, say at the end, in closing after his rebuttal, we want to make sure that if we don't prevail here, that this is heard meaning at all the appellate judges or the supreme court. >> the supreme court does not have to take it, and i'm -- i'm getting to believe that they won't take it. >> tell us why. >> it's not the right case to take for this important issue. it's too obvious here. they need a closer case, i think, to make important law l

i think i want to also flag for the appellate for mr. homdy that we are also at a bit of disservice this evening by not receiving a brief from you, which doesn't allow to prepare and surface the appropriate questions and issues ahead of time, ahead of presentation but i want to thank you for what you've surfaced this evening. i think we have done our best to grapple with those issues you presented orally and i do see the complexity and the various wrinkles to the various ordinances and various permutations of guidance from the department and do see how that could be extremely confusing, and whether the question is a lack of diligence or being mislead, i think it leads us to the same place, which is that, what you hear this evening we don't see a grounds under the law under the clear delineation and guidance provided by the department for granting your appeal, so with that, i will make a motion to deny the appeal on the basis that the notification of tobacco permit denial was properly issued. >> okay. so on that motion, commissioner trasv

and you want to have someone who is an appellate expert on it which i do not believe alina habba is anpellate expert. >> thanks for joining us. >>> so the question is what does a former trump communications aide make of this monster verdict today? anthony scaramucci will join with us his reaction. >>> later on, olympic skier michaela hospitalized today. lindsey vaughn here to talk about what a frightening moment like that is really like. >>> there are very few people in the history of the american judicial system more experienced with libel and defamation cases than donald trump is. the 2016 analysis found those done by the legal analyst, i should note, at the university of southern california found trump and his company, and i'm quoting now, have been involved in a mind-boggling 4,000 lawsuits over the last 30 years. 4,000. that includes suing an architecture critic in 1984 claiming that he was owed $500 million after he called a tower that he was planning to build, quote, one of the sill yes of the things anyone could inflict on new york city. trump once sued an author for saying he

appellate guidance takes time. think this immunity issue is going to have to go to the supreme court of the united states. >> laura: 81% of democrat, chris, believe that trump sudden had should be essentially taken off the ballot. >> that's what is so sad. immunity for presidential actions. they transcend the particular person at issue are 81% of democrats happy with the thought that president biden could be criminally charged by some grand jury in texas arch his term in office is over? that's the pandora's box that's been opened now. if we start to say that presidents have no immunity for their actions within the outer perimeter of their office, it's open season on the president. >> laura: chris, gr great to see you don't. on both issues. >> i'm a two-for. >> laura: you got them both covered. obama is back. and he's worried. we'll explain. newt gingrich, next. ♪ but i'm also a mother of four. and as entrepreneurs, we weigh the cost of every decision. medical bills are no longer a worry for our family. so i can foc

not an immediately appealable issue, most of the time, a defendant has to wait for all of their appellatetrial to avoid this kind of piecemeal litigation, an intermediate delays. there are certain things that are immediately appealable that could not be remedied at the end. so it's an interesting strategic choice for jack smith to say that this is immediately plausible and go right after the -- this is an issue that the courts could decide. but either way, i think this is a strong issue for the government and i think we're going to see a decision any day now, my guest is friday because that's when stuff happens, people want to get stuff done before the weekend. i think we will see a decision friday. i think the case goes back to judge chutkan. >> i think i'm not on the court, i'm a very slow writer. we will squeeze in a break right here. please stay in place, our legal team has to stay in place, when we come back it's back to will he or won't he time for the guy who always says that he wants to testify, and that never does. this time, donald trump might just have a strategic reason to tes

appellate court says that the president is not immune.th wins right now and donald trump appeals it to the supreme court. you're talking about the precedent that they might rely on john this court though has also not exactly had a big fealty to precedent in the past. why do you think that the precedence of nixon and watergate and the tapes and immunity is going to hold when say roe v. wade's precedent did not hold? >> the d.c. circuit, which has this case, i think has an easy question. total immunity is absurd. for reasons that some of your prior guests have said. there's crazy examples but that would give the president license to do anything he wanted. have, tell the fbi director to plant evidence or tell the head of the joint chief of staffs to kill one of his political rivals. i think there's some legitimate immunity and the case will go back to the trial court. the court will work out the details of immunity and ultimately, if trump is convicted, all of that can be reviewed on appeal, but i just don't think it's going to be reviewed n

appeals work their way through the appellate courts. it is not unusual to take many months, if not years, to have a decision work its way all the way through the appellate courts. in terms of when eating correctly gets a money? i don't think it will be in calendar 2024. it could be calendar 2025. i imagine one of the issues that the trump team will raise on appeal is $83 million is too much. i think that they made a good record about why this number is what it is. even if the number gets reduced, i don't see getting reduced substantially. >> barb, i have less than a minute but i want to emphasize something you just said about the appeal and the record on appeal. we did see lawyering that came out of the defense team with -- bio accounts from reading the transcript, following what happened in that trial, there was a failure to preserve the record on appeal by way of objections that didn't happen, or improper, et cetera. can you talk quickly, far, about how important it is to have a skilled trial lawyer when you're in trial versus someone

>> i'm pretty confident all the judges involved in these cases i'm talking about the appellate judges now will decide these cases as quickly as they can in a fair way. i don't think they'll be intimidated, you know, by the trump maga people. i don't think that is ap conce. but he's right. you know, the judicial system is not really equipped to push back in a way that the executive branch can if there are attacks brought against it by members of congress or political parties. that is just the way we have designed our system. and so i think it's incumbent on the courts. that's another reason why they need to expedite these matters so they don't subject themselves to an unnecessarily long period of criticism, because that has a long-term negative impact on the per censionga of the courts. if for instance the delay goes on for two, three months and you have just these withering unfounded attacks on our judicial system, that will have a collateral impact on the system itself. >> letst me ask you one more question just as a sort of matter of course, the 14th amendment case is going to be he

and delay this in an even more meaningful way than just the back and forth between the appellate court and the supreme court. >> by the way, if mr. trump's lawyers had not taken an absolutist position, this is the logical argument for them. they could've said, sure, there might be a circumstance under which a president or former president could be prosecuted criminally. but this one isn't it. all they had to do is argue that what he is charged with in the underlying indictment was an official act. and then it's not an enormous leap to claim immunity for official acts. but they didn't do that. to your earlier point, they staked out this absolute disposition, painted themselves in the corner, and of course judge henderson or another one of the judges was going to ask, precisely that question. because that's the fallacy, that's the weakness in their argument. >> dan, we started this segment off playing some sound from republican mitch mcconnell. who took a decidedly different attack then the trump team is taking today, which is to say the justice department should sort it all out. he does

andrew appel is a professor of computer science at princeton.e regularly wipe -- rights and comments scholarly journals. matt masterson is the director of information integrity at microsoft. he previously served as senior cybersecurity advisor at the department of homeland security, chair of the u.s. election assistance commission, and various positions at the ohio secretary of state office where he oversaw a voting certification system. i pass it over to kim. >> thinking to safeguarding democracy for this opportunity to be on the panel. i want to make sur illicitly rey remarks for a quick overview and ending we should be focusing on going into 2024. so the overt reaching mission over our shoes when i meant to say there, sorry. it slipped. right in monsey's bid to further ensure the security and resilience of a nation's critical infrastructure. we provide cybersecurity resources and risk management advice to state and local governments and private sector entities critical infrastructure assets. our intellectual security despite the 2017: russian

this retaliation, not surprisingly resulted in illness and stress, as well as necessitated the appellant to take a large amount of time from work to consult with his attorneys and other advisors. and quote, or did we was order to pay carson for $100000.00 for legal fees and costs. but the story doesn't end there. frankly, carson's complaints about d a. we were just beginning the m s p b is an independent clause. i'd you additional agency in the executive branch of the us government that serves as the guardian of federal merits systems. its mission is to protect the merits systems, principles, and promote and effective federal workforce free of prohibited personnel practices . in other words, it is precisely the place where a federal whistleblower should go to report evidence of waste fraud abuse illegality, or threats to the public health and public safety. but it doesn't necessarily work that way. person told an interviewer this, he said my 30 plus here was the blowing story, has essentially 2 parts. the 1st part was against d. a. we. the 2nd part is against the office of special counci

. >> well, i was a trial judge, i have never been an appellate judge. i don't know all the dynamics that go on between the three individuals who heard these cases. but it seems to me that it should not take a long period of time to decide them. we talk about this presidential immunity case, and it is something that was raised, you, know some months ago. we talked about it for a pretty long period of time. but if you step back and look at what the claim is, it's really not much there. this is a case that should be decided relatively quickly. my hope would be that that would be the case. so that the necessary appeals can be filed and the judicial system can get through the case and actually put this case before a jury. >> but you say it should be decided quickly, for some of us on the outside, who are neither trial lawyers or appellate lawyers it doesn't seem like it has moved quickly. it's at this point, can it move? does 15 days seem like a long time to or is it relatively expeditious given the timeframe that we are operating in? is it still in the real

. >> is an appellate court going to look at judge engoron, you tell me, i'm not familiar with arguing. i haven't been to trial, thank god, but is judge engoron acting like most judges do? trump keeps saying he's not being fair. he's ruling unfairly against him, and you know, he's a colorful guy. is there anything that the appellate court might look like with his rulings and actions in that court that he might say i don't know if this worked sdl . >> there's an interesting factor to this case, which isn't common. it's a bench trial. a judge only trial that arguably may lead to different, more issues raised on appeal. but, i mean, the trump team is going to appeal everything here, the summary judgment decision, judge engoron's decisions during trial. they have appealed, for example, when judge engoron tried to gag trump. they're going to appeal every aspect of this that they can. points on appeal are often things we didn't notice during the trial, pieces of evidence that came in that the defense objected to that really may not have made a blip on the radar but it's part of that overall

as our legal team and appellate team made clear, that would be a disaster for our country. that would be a direct attack on democracy, and that cannot happen. what was very significant today, i'm sure you all caught it, it is the special counsel conceded that it was president obama that was being prosecuted for a drone strike, then they would have to consider immunity. but when it's not, when it's president trump, then they are taking the position that there is no immunity for presidential acts that would require a president is carrying out his job responsibilities. if we adopt with the special counsel wanted, we adopt what president biden wants, then we open the pandora's box of political prosecution after political prosecution after political prosecution. in fact, joe biden could be prosecuted for trying to stop this man from becoming the next president of the united states. we don't need political prosecutions, we need political process. i would like to introduce president trump. fmr. pres. trump: i want to thank you all and we had a momentous day in terms of what we hav