but i don't see-i'm very sympathetic to the appellate, extremely sympathetic to the appellate, but in fact, nothing that was-this does not meet the bar. >> i too am deeply sympathetic to the petitioner and i'm slightly uncomfortable with a little bit of the process and the way things can change in a way that might prejudice to file a appeal that is subsequentially unable to. i am comforted somewhat by the fact that there are other remedies that exist that just are not ours, including report of-with respect to the permit for the trash enclosure to the extent there was any actual agreement, civil action. unfortunately, given the rules under which we operate or fortunately depending on your opponent of view, i don't see this as being the bar of something that should come within our jurisdiction. >> i concur with fellow commissioners. i'm deeply sympathetic to the requester in this case and ultimately doesn't meet the standard that we need to grant this jurisdiction request, but i am also heartened as commissioner eppler said, that there are alternative complaint methods available to you

or i can ask the i can ask the appellant. well if, if i could have the floor just to share my thoughts before we go too far down the path of various motions. but, i'm not so in favor of a continuance. i agree that we're we're kind of punishing good behavior on the part of the permit holder, with further delays, so if i were to stack rank the three outcomes that i see before us, you know, obviously there's the potential for, granting the appeal, but i don't realistically see that as being in play this evening as between, denying the appeal outright, granting the appeal with the amendment or or granting a continuance, if the parties agree to that, i would i would say that the continuance is, the one that i prefer the least as between those three, i think i think we have a good project here, that's code compliant, with, with parties with, with the permit holder. that seems very conscientious, that that has, expressed and i think exhibited a willingness and openness to, connecting with, with the neighbors. and so i'm not sure tha

nedeau action requested by appellant: appellant appeals the january 12, 2023, order of abatement and assessment of costs. appellant seeks “that the order of abatement requiring painting of the building be stayed until construction can be completed.” and the does want will present their case first, they may come forward. >> may i make a disclosure i would like to disclose that someone from my firm has been contacted by a representative of the owner of this property to observe the property that person is a husband of someone that works - not engaged xhubl and will not have an affect on my ability to new york state that disclosure. >> thank you commissioner sommer. >> okay. >> good morning. i'm the senior housing inspector and presenting the case this morning 102 baker st. lot one 2 one 9 this is a contract. >> e1. case no. 6911: 102 baker st. - complaint # 202290668 two family r-3 residential dwelling and the notice of violation was issued this case was present item three, 4 and 6 on the violation were it's been a long time coming. >> phil do you have the power point? >> sfgov are you

this is what the appellate court did. as you know, there was that appellate bond of $454 million that mr. trump was staring down as deadline to pay today, but the appellate court this morning said that if he pays $175 million over the next ten days, that will satisfy that for now so it hut as complete brakes on james' attempts to try and seize anything. the president during a court hearing here in the break in that say that he is honored that the appellate court made that issue and that he is going to put up the cash. >> it will be my honor to post and post whatever is necessary whether it be cash or security bonds it's a decision we respect and appreciate sr. much. reporter: he turned around and said cash and not as successful in this hearing today and had to deal with the stormy daniel hush money trial and the judge decided to actually set the date for this trial for april 15th. trump's attorneys are trying to delay that yet again. mr. trump faces 34 counts of business fraud dealing with the stormy daniels case and he's

and i find the appellants arguments unavailing. so i would, uh, uphold the appeal, uphold the permit as properly issued. thanks, everyone. i'm in line with with the comments of commissioner eppler and everybody else. uh, i think i am also sympathetic to the appellants last point with respect to the, uh, actual use. uh, but uh, but to then, uh, turn on to the permit holder and ask them to verify the actual use, uh, in order to qualify for the appeal, feels like a bridge too far and out of step with, uh, with the normal process that we go through with, with these types of decisions. uh, so with that, i would move to deny the appeal on the basis that the permit was properly issued. so that's the motion on the table. yes okay. thank you. so on that motion, commissioner trasvina, i, vice president lemberg, i commissioner eppler i commissioner swig i so that motion carries 5 to 0 and the appeal is denied. thank you. so we are now moving on to item number seven. this is a special item, um, discussion and possible action. the board shall c

division to do. >> martha: do you have any sense of weather or not the appellate division is sympathetic to this argument or what their timeframe might be to respond to it because five days is not that much time. >> not that much time we pressed the fact this is urgent i will say the appellate division has been great and looking at these things in a timely manner and there were days we have taken things to the appellate division and waited to be heard they heard us they definite we can they have listened to our arguments fairly don't forget this case the judge had a trial he disregarded the appellate division that shortened the statute of limitations here and said this case was limited and that he just disregarded it so that in itself should to me show this judge put his nose up to the appellate division disregarded the rule of law and the higher courts and in that alone they should take that into account let alone the other injustices we saw. >> martha: i want to play something for you quickly from the view to get a quick thought from you on this and then i will swing over to jonathan t

trump from the appellate court. we do expect that he will be able to post that $175 million bond. that means that attorney general james will not be able and will not move forward to try and seize any of trump's properties or any of his cash and other assets in order to try and satisfy that $454 million bond. he does not have to do that now. if he puts up that $175 million, which we do expect. it's a bit of a different story in the manhattan criminal court behind me dealing with the hush money trial, dealing with stormy daniels, mr. trump charged with 34 cans of business fraud, basically, for allegedly funneling money to the porn star through his former fixer, michael cohen. his attorneys are seeking to again delay this criminal trial once again, but it seems like the judge is not having any of that. the issue this morning has to do with the hundreds of thousands of pages, a hundred thousand or so, that the defense turned over to the state dealing with michael cohen, but the judge says only a few hundred and does no

he respects the opinion of the appellate division and we will abide by that. we will put up cash or a bond, securities, cash, or bond, whatever it is. we will put it up very quickly. we will win the case. maybe i will have todd say a couple of words and then if you have any questions or anything you want to ask, ok. wherever you may be, please. >> thank you, president trump. as you said in court today, we very much believe that starting this trial in april or even starting this trial at any point before the election is completely unfair to president trump. it is completely unfair to the american people who are evaluating who they want to be the next president and we are going to continue to fight. we are going to continue to do everything we can to defend president trump in that courtroom and likely said today, we believe that we have a tremendous amount of information now in our hands to help us do that. and in any event, we certainly feel as if the date that the judge held today, april 15, is not a day we should go to trial and we will continue to fight. qui

but the good days that the appellate division is fair. a lot of money still, but the judge is corrupt in my opinion, the most overturn a judge, five times in this case alone. he ruled against me before he knew anything about the case. the whole case was about damages . there were no damages. perhaps you will get him to tell you about what took place in terms of the settlement negotiation. those were into the numbers he was discussing. it's a disgrace what is happening in our country. we have to get our country back, and we are going to get our country back. november 5 i believe will be the most important day in the history of our country. we will get these people out of there and we will seal up the borders and we will, as i say, drill baby drill can get energy costs down, get rid of the ridiculous electric car mandate -- no one has ever heard of anything so foolish and so stupid -- and we will bring crime back to law and order. we will get those words "law and order" back because our cities are a disaster. greatly respected the decision

perhaps one or more of the appellate courtjudges have appellate court judges have some appellate courtjudgesurt below stop perhaps there may be a reduction, eventually, of the decision in the trial court. i think this decision gives them hope to donald trump's lawyers that maybe that finaljudgement won't be quite as massive. still, you know, gobsmacked income of $175 million or so. but maybe it won't be quite as large as was anticipated. so yes, this was a surprise in this 1—of—a—kind civil trial. surprise in this 1-of-a-kind civil trial.— surprise in this 1-of-a-kind civiltrial. ., , civil trial. what happens if he doesnt civil trial. what happens if he doesn't make _ civil trial. what happens if he doesn't make the _ civil trial. what happens if he doesn't make the deadline? l civil trial. what happens if he i doesn't make the deadline? the same thing _ doesn't make the deadline? iie: same thing that would doesn't make the deadline? "iie: same thing that would happen with the half billion dollar number that was reduced by the appellate court. if he doesn't get the $175 million together, th

>> he has successfully appealed prior orders to the appellate court and the appellate court has on multiple occasions reversed this judge. i would expect if there is an order on these jury instructions, as she is already signaling he will go right back to the appellate court. >> let's move to donald trump lashing out at the daughter of the judge overseeing the new york hush money case. there are gag orders there. it is pretty broad. it doesn't specifically say you cannot attack the judge or his family, but court officers and the like, where do you think this one stands? do you think the judge says i am going to have to expand the gag order? could he punish donald trump for what he's done in violating, in his eyes, this order? >> i think he has put him on notice. stop attacking members of the court, the members of the d.a.s office. start with these public attacks. it won't stand. if he doesn't going forward i think he would hold him in contempt. >> in this particular case jeff stormy daniels and michael cohen likely to take the stand. both of them are saying that donald trump should be worri

i respect the appellate division for reducing that ridiculous at was put on by a corrupt judge.ght to be seriously looked at, especially fraudulent evalu. he values mar-a-lago -- to 100 , the biggest experts in the business. he ought to be looked at and james ought to be looked at because she is like the puppet master of the■& judge and you know, this state is losing tremendous prestige. it's losing its people. they are fleeing and violent crime is flourishing and we can't have that, can't have that. have that. and it's happening in other cities, but not with what they are doing which is incredible.te case of the trial that we just left, one of the many. every one of them is run by biden and his thugs. so far, it is backfiring because the people of this country understand it. it is backfiring but they are all of these different cases. so ridiculous, the cases. every one of them is ridiculous. you take a look at any one oth f them, it would not make any difference. this is all weaponization of doj and fbi. they rated my house in violation of this thing called the fourth amendment

state to 31 georgia appellate 22. that's 1998 case, stated a potential conflict of interest existed in the appearance of impropriety existed davenport v. state 157 georgia appellate 70 for this 1981 case that was decided seven years before williams, when there is at least the appearance of impropriety, a defendant is denied phantom fundamental fairness in the state's prosecution of the charges against him or her there were also rules that govern prosecutors lawyers, and in general are bound to preserve and avoid even the appearance of impropriety that's brown v. state to 56 georgia appellate 603 to zero to 2000 to head v. state they prosecutors close personal relationship with the victim in a case may create at least the appearance of a problem execution unfairly based on private interests rather than one properly based on vindication of public interest aba, criminal justice standards for the prosecution function standard 3.3 dash one point to see prosecutors should avoid appearance of impropriety and performing the p

if the appellate courts say you were wrong. >> what is that personal interest?so that personal interest can be -- there's no definition of that under georgia law and it could be a personal financial interest. it could be a personal interest related to bias against a particular defendant, which sort of falls into the forensic misconduct box. we have here a very personal financial interest that has been laid out in terms of money received by miss willis as a result of the scheme that she sat up and to get to the issue of the personal interest in the context of an appearance, i think that is important. i do want to suggest to the court that there are a number of cases that postdate this actual conflict of interest language that suggests in some of the cases from the '90s that you have to pay attention to what this looks like to the public. and i agree with all of the law and i'm sure the estate is going to stand here and say can be a speculative or conjectural time of personal interest. we don't have that here. we have something very concrete. as the judge put it,

donald trump did just address cameras saying he appreciated the decision of the appellate court.l decision that he would owe and have to put up this initial bond here. there is a reporter in the room that asked the question of whether he'd turn to a foreign entity to help cover the $175 million bond. there's still serious questions as to how he will be able to cover that, whether in the form of liquid cash that he may already have at his disposal or whether there is something else guaranteeing it as a personal gift or a loan to him, or whether he is going to turn to an outside entity in order to help out. of course, there's also the potential of using one of his properties. he could potentially try to sell-off a property to use as collateral to put up the $175 million bond. we know that the trumps over the course of the last three weeks had been maing calls to individuals trying to gain relief. they'd already went to 30 different insurance companies asking for the $450 million bond. the decision here in the last hour, though, from the appellate court to lower the amount that he h

i'm gone and deep on the filings gone to the appellate court on this issue.mber 1 the law allows for exceptions whether that's totally forgive the need for a bond entirely in order to get this stay or even for a lesser amount. so he goes through all of that, he also in his brief to the appellate court goes through justifications related to the eighth amendment's. all of which give the appellate court in this case the law of lead room in order to grant an exception to the typical policy and law with regards to the bonds. so with monday fast approaching, i am skeptical that this is going to be the end for trump's real estate and its properties. think something explosive might happen. otherwise the trump team does have a lot of appeal options and letitia james is going to have to go through all sorts of litigation in order to get her hands on these buildings with all the people that have ownership interest in the building as well. >> and i wonder how much do business consideration would be impacted here if you look at, you know, the real estate involved here in

ana. >> glenn, now he's asking for the appellate court to pause the judgment. do you think they will? can he still appeal the judgment if they don't? >> an nar, without wanting to turn this into a law school class, there's a really interesting battle going on in the middle of this new court filing. in this filing donald trump's lawyers say, well, look, tish james says, the attorney general for new york, that the appellate court does not have the authority under the authority and the law of new york state to stay the execution of him, either having him pay out the judgment or filing a bond to secure the full amount of the judgment. donald trump says, oh, she's dead wrong. they actually do have the authority, but when you actually read through the brief, donald trump engages in a little bait and switch. he cites all federal cases standing for the proposition that the new york appellate court has the authority. the problem is this is a new york state court proceeding. he cites no cases in the new york state law. to answer your question, i don't think he's going to

one, there is now a trial date for the hush money case, and two, some leniency from a new york appellatert on its half a million dollar bond. on hush money, judge juan merchan ruled he saw no reason to further delay, scheduling the stormy daniels trial for april 15th. what will it take to seat a jury? what kind of juror will each side be looking for, and what bragg will need to do to convince those jurors that paying off stormy daniel was actually a felony. we'll get to all of that in a moment. but first we want to start with the bond. a new york appeals court knocked it down from $450 million and counting to 175 million. donald trump says he will pay it quickly within the ten-day extension. but more importantly, what does that decision mean for an appeal of the judgment itself? joining us now, nbc news investigations correspondent tom winter, msnbc legal correspondent, lisa rubin, former new york assistant attorney general adam pollock, and nbc news business and data correspondent, brian cheung. everybody, welcome. lisa, let's talk about knocking down this bond. it's a really big deal.

so they would still mean the defendants would still have to prove to the appellate court in the next 45 days that it has to decide that her behavior or the office is compromised, it would have to be another argument, would it not >> so it would have to be the argument that judge mcafee got it wrong when he heard those arguments and he made a determination that under georgia law there was not a conflict of interests that would require for fani willis to be disqualified from the case and her entire office so they're trying to say, i mean, they know judge mcafee considered these arguments the same argument that they put forward before him. i think the difference is just saying when he looked at these facts, when he looked at the law, he got it wrong. and i believe that they have 45 days to accept the case, whether or not they're going to hear the appeal. but judge mcafee, interestingly has said, we're not staying this case. we're moving forward while the appellate court determines whether or not there are here, they will hear the appeal. i think judge mcafee thinks he's used belt and su

perhaps one or more of the appellate courtjudges have appellate court judges have some appellate courtjudgesduction, eventually, of the decision in the trial court. so think this decision gives them hope to donald trumplawyers that maybe the finaljudgement won't be quite as massive. still, you know, gobsmacked in, or so. as massive. still, you know, gobsmacked in, orso. but maybe it won't be quite as large as was anticipated. so yes, this was anticipated. so yes, this was anticipated. so yes, this was a surprise in this 1—of—a—kind civil trial. was a surprise in this 1-of-a-kind civil trial. let's look at some _ 1-of-a-kind civil trial. let's look at some other - 1-of-a-kind civil trial. let's look at some other news i 1-of-a-kind civil trial. let's i look at some other news from around the world. dear mifi will be the youngest president of san miguel. he was released from present for basal posts after alleged injustices in the judicial system. after alleged injustices in the judicialsystem. he after alleged injustices in the judicial system. he said he would govern with humidity and would g

we will abide by the decision of the appellate division and post either a bond, equivalent securities, or cash. this also shows how ridiculous and outrageous the initial decision was at $450 million. i did nothing wrong, and new york should never be put in a position like this again."

>> well, the appellate court is going to defer to what the trial judge said. but the trial judge in this case when you look at the ruling that he reached, he is very critical of the law, kind of confused what the precedent is. he says that effectively in his motion in his ruling and he also says that he isn't particularly confident in his ruling or at least words to communicate that. i think the appellate court will step in that they support the ruling he made or draw some sort of line in the sand as to where the law perhaps need to be clarified. we're a couple months away from hearing a decision from the appellate court on that. they have 45 days to reach their determination whether they will make that decision. but the appellate court does have an important point to make because the trial judge seemed uncertain and we need further clarification. that's why the trial judge certified that to the appellate court, i think. >> harris: she kicked her ex off the case and see how the case holds together. california judge seems skeptical during arguments to dismiss h

the transfer of the costal complaint to the court of the appellate instance takes about another sixthe defendants are not going to appeal to the supreme court of the russian federation, but in principle there is another 2 months allocated for consideration somewhere. another recent high-profile case was in february , the arbitration court of the sverdlovsk region approved the transfer of the chelyabinsk electrometallurgical plant plants into state ownership. privatization in the nineties was declared illegal. assets belonged businessman yuri antipov. the illegal enrichment of the businessman was initially appreciated almost. 26 billion rubles, and then the amount increased to 105 billion. in addition, demands were made against the former business partner and antipov’s family. in consideration of the penalty, the prosecutor general's office asks to seize the benefit of the state, including the ivanovo foundry, an enterprise of the oriand agricultural holding , the largest wine producer in the country , kuban wine. in february, the moskovsky district court of st. petersburg satisfied

i think the appellate court -- some people have been critical of them.y probably said where is he going and where are these buildings going? remember, there's a monitor in place here. >> an independent monitor. >> former federal judge barbara jones. this company can't do any financial maneuvers or transactions without her approval. so that could also be a reason. they even stated in their decision that the federal monitor still stays in place. that could be a reason why they do this. >> yasmin vossoughian and sue craig, thank you both. catherine, you're going to stay with me. >>> new efforts by the yauntd nations toward a cease-fire in gaza. what sources are telling us about the possibility of that actually happening. we'll head to tel aviv next. you're watching "chris jansing reports" on a very busy monday. we'll be back after this. usy moy we'll be back after this now i'll be smelling fresh all day long. [sniff] still fresh. ♪♪ get 6x longer-lasting freshness, plus odor protection. try for under $5! ♪ students... students of any age, from anywhere. stu

in amusement sales versus state, georgia appellate 727.t's a case that cites whitworth, the court said if the assigned prosecutor has acquired a personal interest or stake in the conviction, the trial court abuses this discretion in denying a motion to disqualify him and the defendant is entitled to a new trial. new trial even without a showing of prejudice. so that means if we show the court today -- i think we have through the proceedings today and before -- that ms. willis has developed a very personal interest in this case and your honor denies this motion, we're coming back all over again if the appellate courts say you were wrong. >> so what is that personal interest? >> the personal interest can be -- there's no definition of that under georgia law, and it could be o'a personal financial interest. it could be a personal interest related to bias against a particular defendant, which sort of falls into the forensic misconduct box. but we have here a very personal financial interest that's been laid out in terms of money received by ms

the american public watching all this play out and what do you make of the appellate court's decision today and massive reduction in his bond is this vindication for the former president? >> yes, a message to letitia james she's overreaching to the prosecution and we're going to let the process work out and bedeuce it for the beginning to the end of this case and there's no harm and no victim and no damage. our colleague kerri used an example about dorothy red shoes a. better example, i'll take a rock and hit your brand new rolls royce and i'll say take me to court. if there's not a scratch on that car, how much do i owe you? where are the victims? there are no victims and i submit to you this case will be basically reversed and no fine imposed against president trump. >> aishah: let me talk about letitia james here because you brought her up. she's also trying to stay defiant in what the court has already ruled and her statement she said that the judgment against him plus interest still stands. what do you make of that? >> i've been a lawyer for 34 years so i'll give you my expertise

the former president and his defense can appeal that and they're doing it now to the appellate court trying to pause the $454 million or cut it down. she could force a sale of president trump's properties as well as he could ask for supporters and donors for money. then, of course, there is the issue of truth social in the reporting of president trump's saga, it is always colliding story lines. two major legal cases here. at the same time on wall street he could make a windfall of more than $3.6 billion from stock because today truth social is going public. the problem with that, though, is he cannot sell the stock by law for six months, perhaps his lawyers the high-priced lawyers can figure out a way to get an advance on that $3 billion so he can pay the $4.5 million. see what happens later on today. the deadline gets continued, more expensive from the former president. a cumbersome, long process. the interest payment on the james account $1 hundred thousand a day. we'll see what the judge rules probably within the next hour or so here in manhattan criminal court. back to you >> har

and that will be, you know, go through the appellate process if he loses the appellate process.id say the appellate process has to move forward faster than usual, this will have to be argued in or the briefs will have to be submitted in august, which is faster than this appeals court usually works. but if this is upheld $530 million plus interest is what he's going to have to come up with. >> jennifer. if the briefs have to be in by august when is a ruling likely. >> so september is when they start arguments for the terms. so if they argue it in september, then it's with the appeals court. i mean, the fact that they issued this ruling saying they wanted it sped up might suggest to the panel that ultimately gets it that they should move more quickly than normal. but it can take months and months. yeah. >> this is a notoriously slow. >> when you say it's with the appeals court, you mean they make the, the lawyers for both sides make the arguments in september. and then it's up to the judges when to rule. exactly and they have all the time in the world. >> they do they it's up to t

i thank the appellate division by acting quickly.is should not be allowed to happen. our correspondent nada tawfik has the latest from new york city. it was a day of mixed news for donald trump into of the cases here in new york. firstly civil business fraud case where he was ordered in february to pay $464 was ordered in february to pay $1164 million after he was found liable for inflating his property values to get better loans. he faced a deadline today of paying that massive bondin today of paying that massive bond in order to stave off collection efforts while his appeal plays out. if you missed today's deadline that the new york attorney general said she would begin teasing his assets. but the last minute a court of appeal stepped in and agreed to let him pay a far lesser amount. a bond of $175 million that he has to secure within the next ten days. but it was far less great news for donald trump when it came to his criminal case here in new york, where there was a pre—trial hearing in the courthouse by me. but criminal case is

you had a run rae judge that just ruled against something that the appellate division has knocked out case, but that's not the point. they don't care. they just want to hurt the man. and, again, they're sending tremors across this country. and by the way, maria, people internationally are watching this charade. america's losing our standing in the world. when they see this, people invest in america from all over the planet because they know we're the safe harbor, that this kind of stuff can't exist and and doesn't exist, and now they're seeing this exist in the united states. you know the damage that does to our country? maria: erin, you and your brother -- eric, you and your brother have also been ordered to pay a judgment. what role did you have in any of this? >> absolutely nothing, and the judge even in his final, you know, closing days said that we had nothing to do with it. so all of a sudden when we were put in the judgment, we each have to pay $4-5 million and we can't do business in new york which the appellate court has already stayed, i'm saying, wait a second. in your fina

trial court in the federal system or an appellate court.he state system has the primary role here. just one judge has reviewed this law and made this, in my view, absurd ruling and imposed this penalty. if -- i think be wise. he has to have these new york judges take a look at this. and, hopefully, they will redeem the new york legal system by saying it's not about trump, it's about us, and this is way over the top. march yes, sir. great stuff. the great jonathan turley. thank you ever so much. we appreciate it. as always. >> thanking or larry. larry: let's chew on this a little bit more maybe from a political angle. charlie hurt, fox news contributor, and katie pavlich, editor at townhall.com and fox news contributor, and if that weren't spiffy enough, we have roman yes ravi, former white house deputy strategic comms director and ceo of daravi strategies who pulled me out of a lot of hot water way back when. [laughter] let me start with katie. where do you -- not legally, but politically what does all this spell? >> well, i think about the

yep, appeals court, grown ups modify his bond for appeal in new york state appellate court slashed mr. trump's payment about 70% we talk about it with gre gregg jarrett and joe concha. where are democrats declaring war on israel, john ratcliffe weighing in on that, and let's keep speaker mike johnson, we have claudia tenney. breitbart economics and finance editor will tell us all details, so for more on president trump's bond, being slashed by almost 2/3, lydia hu is live manhattan criminal court. reporter: the slashing of the bond very big development, a positive development for the former president, welcome news to him and his camp, we're outside of the criminal court in manhattan, there is another development in the case involving district attorney alvin bragg, the hush money case, we have a jury date for a jury trial to begin, april 15. only about 3 weeks away. that was not the, vepg the events that former president was hoping to unfold today, they were hoping to get that case dismissed or delayed after documents were produced to them late, as trump arrived for the hearings today,

he's talking about my judges, my appellate judges. get ready.or spending time with us and starting with us. kim will be back later in the hour. when we come back, in the days after the deadly terror attack in moscow that has left more than 130 people dead, gaslighting by vladimir putin's regime, they are trying to use the terror attack to blame ukraine even as u.s. officials say the terrorist attack was carried out by an offshoot of isis. that story's next. and later in the hour, why the far right of the republican party has its knives out for house speaker mike johnson, who could soon be facing the same kind of humiliation and rebellion that led to the ousting of his predecessor, kevin mccarthy. "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere today. s ter a. don't go anywhere today. there s that work better together. like your workplace benefits and retirement savings. voya helps you choose the right amounts without over or under investing. so you can feel confident in your financial choices voya, well planned, well inv

our appellate courts generally, it holds true for appellate courts handling criminal cases and handling civil cases, are overburdened. you could use more judges appointed to handle the flood of appeals that appellate courts in all jurisdictions have to handle each year. so, you know, what i will expect to see now is the court setting a briefing schedule, where both parties pill have to file their briefs and their oppositions, the court will then likely set an oral argument schedule, though an oral argument is not necessary on appeal. sometimes the appellate court judges can resolve the case on the papers as they say, just on the written court filings. but, you know, this is something that could take months or i'm afraid to say it could even take a year or more to work its way through the appellate court system. >> lisa rubin and glen kirschner, thank you so very much for being with us this morning. especially on this breaking news at this hour. >>> turning now to our special coverage of president biden's state of the union address, we heard a fiery call to action from the president last

that's the execution of that judgment. >> julie: the appellate court doesn't move that quickly.as to come up with the money or she will start seizing assets. republican lawmakers are saying a new whistleblower is claiming the c.i.a. blocked federal investigators from interviewing a key hunter biden associate. i wonder why? kevin morris joined hunter in one of his capitol hill stunts where he crashed a house hearing on hunter's failure to comply with a subpoena. now the wealthy hollywood attorney has also paid some of hunter's legal fees. conflict of interest there? here is house judiciary chair jim jordan. >> we don't know if he is an asset, we don't know if he is regularly talking with someone being surveilled. this is kevin morris, a guy who has loaned and/or bought millions of dollars for hunter biden. loaned him $6 million. bought a million dollars in artwork. so many things wrong with this investigation and that's why chairman comer and i have sent a letter finding out why count they talk to the guy? >> julie: questions about why the f.b.i. didn't want to hear from tony bob

i respect the appellate division for substantially reducing that ridiculous amount of money. >> reporter: with no lenders willing to cover the staggering penalty while he appeals, mr. trump was facing the prospect of new york's attorney general seizing his iconic properties and bank accounts as soon as today. but now has ten days to come up with the far smaller bond. mr. trump saying he has the cash and was pressed by nbc's garrett haake. >> now that the bond's been reduced, are you going to start putting money into your campaign? >> well, first of all, it's none of your business, i mean, frankly. but i might. >> reporter: the court found mr. trump falsely inflated the value of his properties to get banks to give better loan terms. his attorneys are appealing, saying there were no victims, that the banks were repaid. but today new york attorney general letitia james highlighted the former president is still on the hook should he ultimately lose his appeal, saying "donald trump is still facing accountability for his staggering fraud. the $464 million judgment plus interest against donald

but now a state appellate court has ruled john woodward can be tried again.an 30 years after faa santa clara county courtroom thursday, theúcalifornia sixth district court of appealsc rulig a third trial for accused murderer john woodward would not violate constitutional protections against being tried twice for the same crime. the two previous trials ended with sphung juries.úlegalúanalystt& michael cardoza. >> therec was no jury, reasonabe jury or trier of fact based upo& >> prosecutors in 2022 refiled murder charges against woodward after dna evidence and new spfingerprints linked him to th