let's go to elie honig.r reaction to the verdict and what happens next and donald trump, no question he will try to appeal. >> for sure. this is a massive number, far in excess of anything i think anyone really a -- expected, 18+ times the amount of the verdict in the first trial and tran20's lawyers explicitly asked the jury to send a message and that is what they have done, 60+ million dollars in punitive damages, that is a message to a person who essentially the jury says we don't think you can be deterred for anything less than this massive amount of money. yes, donald trump absolutely has the right to appeal the verdict and the prior verdict, one potential complication is how do we reconcile these verdicts, the verdict in the first case which cover the actual sexual assault at south plus defamation made after donald trump was president, that was for $5 million, now we have a verdict for only defamation that is many times that, he will say you can't reconcile these, the other had a far lower verdict but

paula reid, elie honig, thank you very much. >>> conservatives test driving a new campaign strategy inina. how they are hoping to use menthol cigarettes to take on joe biden. >>> and, life imitating art in wild fashion, the oscars, the blockbuster, the snubs that have ryan gosling speak out now. >> what have you done? what are you wearing? >>> new this morning, a conservative group is using south carolina as a testing ground for its message, opposing the fda's proposed ban on menthol cigarettes. cnn's rene marsh joins us now. what's the goal here? who is this directed at? >> john, only in a world where the incumbent president is facing this, enthusiasm problem, from his base, can menthol cigarettes of all topics be seen as this political effective wedge issue in a presidential election, and that's where we're at. we're talking about liberty policy foundation, this is a conservative advocacy group, they launched this digital ad campaign in south carolina, just this morning, you're looking at video of it there. and within the ad, it says -- and i'm quoting, president biden keeps talking

with us now, elie honig, former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york. this just in, it's january 31st. it's the day he told us he would try to have a ruling by. what are you watching for? >> so john, a couple things. big picture this ruling could determine the future of donald trump's business in new york and elsewhere. to an extent that future has already been determined because it's important to keep in mind, judge engoron ruled on one of the causes of action before this trial started. he found the trump organization libel for repeated fraud and said i intend to suspend their business certificate, which would end their ability to do business in new york state. i'm looking for a couple things. first of all, there are six additional causes of action relating to insurance fraud, falsifying business records. will the judge find the trump organization libel or not libel for those. second of all, what will the number be? the a.g. is asking for a mammoth amount. $370 million. the judge can give anywhere from 0 to $370 million. finally, will the judge reaffir

i want to turn to elie honig.john's point, this is a big day on a big case that could totally change the face of donald trump's business. >> closing arguments today, so the sort of final chapter in this. people should understand, donald trump has been through a bunch of civil lawsuits. for example, he was found liable in the e. jean carroll case, another carrying on of that trial next week. normally what donald trump is cuts a check if he loses and moves on with his life. this will threaten the very existence of the trump organization. they have already been found lie blg by the judge on one of the seven causes of action here, so the penalties the trump organization is facing here, the a.g. is asking for $370 million and more important is the cancellation of the trump organization's business certificates here in new york. if that happens they're literally out of business. that's what's at stake here. >> a couple things, the fact this is going to be decide by one judge. trump's team didn't argue to get a jury. they

. >> with us now, paula reid and also elie honig. and let me read what the judge told the parties yesterday to set the stage here. told the jury too. for the purposes of this trial, it has been determined already that mr. trump did sexual assault ms. carroll. that he knew when he made the statements about ms. carroll that the statements were false, that he made them with reckless disregard to whether they were true or false. it has already been determined. that is the legal backdrop to this, there is a campaign b backdrop to this, but e. jean skarl oig carroll is taking the stand with the man she says sexually assaulted her sitting feet away. >> and the judge summarizing the findings of the trial that occurred last spring, that the former president did not participate in at all. soe so he says the verdict carries over and so they are just focused on damages. but you're right, let's talk about this moment for e. jean carroll. she testified back in the spring because trump wasn't in the courtroom. and here months later after a jury fou

joining me now is elie honig, senior legal analyst, former prosecutor, author of "untouchable." nice to see you again. big picture, how many trials might trump realistically face before the election? >> that is the big question. i'm going to give you an ironclad precise answer right now. probably one, maybe two, could be zero, but that chance is low. but definitely not three or four. we can write off the fulton county d.a.'s case. that is not going to be tried before the election. the d.a. has asked for an august 2024 trial date conceding that would go into 2025, not going to happen. up until recently, it looked like the one that was going to go firsts was jack smith's d.c. federal election subversion indication scheduled for march 4th of this year. but that has major questions about timing. then you have the hush money case scheduled for late march and then you have jack smith's other case, the mar-a-lago classified documents case, scheduled for may. i don't know dominos or chess or musical chairs is the best analogy, but it has elements of all three. >> so you heard my analysi

. >>> let's continue the conversation and bring in senior legal analyst elie honig. always good to see you. this all focuses on the 14th amendment. remind us of impactly what it says and the key legal issues. >> always start with the tech. let's look at section 3. no person shall hold any a office who shall have engaged in insurrection. it seems sort of common sense and straight forward. however, the problem is the way this is being interpreted and applyied across the states has varied. let's take a quick lock at the landscape. seven states have rejected these challenges. some are still pending a appeal. there are other states where challenges have been withdrawn or are pending in various states that have not yet come to final fruition. but we have colorado and maine, where those challenges have been accepted for the time being. those are also pending ae appeal. we're waiting on trump. the colorado case will be appealed. the next step is the u.s. supreme court. the maine case hasn't gone through the maine court system. that decision was by the secretary of state. so

. >> cnn illegal analyst elie honig is with us. good morning. riveting i thought to listen to the entire thing yesterday. talk to us about the core argument on both sides. >> we got to nerd out. it was glorious. the nation got to see our criminal justice process in action. high level. well done by all the judges and lawyers yesterday. let's talk about the arguments. now, donald trump's team in the written briefs, the memos they submit before the hearing they made this argument, they said donald trump is immune here because what he's charged with doing fell within the outer perimeter of his job as the president. that was what he said going into the argument. that's what i was expecting to hear yesterday. we got a little bit of a curveball in what he actually featured as his argument. instead, trump's lawyers came up with this sort of new formulation where the only way a president or a former president can be indicted if he is first impeached in the house, then convicted in the senate, and then and only then, according to trump's attorneys, can he

this will be historic, no matter which way they come out. >> elie honig there, well, u.s.resident joe biden kicked off his campaign to be reelected this year, the speech in pennsylvania that includes a strong warning. cnn's mj lee reports he's calling his potential opponent donald trump a threat to democracy. >> today we're here to answer the most important of questions. is democracy still america's sacred cause? it's what the 2024 election is all about. >> reporter: in his inaugural campaign speech of the new year president joe biden warning of the stark and urgent stakes of the upcoming presidential election. the president repeatedly excoriating donald trump. >> donald trump's campaign is about him, not america, not you. >> reporter: as the biden campaign gears up for another potential matchup against the former president come november. >> we all know who donald trump is. the question we have to answer is, who are we? that's what's at stake. who are we? and the year ahead, as you talk to your family and friends, cast your ballots, the power is in your hands, i refuse to

joining us now to go over the legal arguments, elie honig, i want to start there. and not the full 90 seconds because it would take a while to dissect all of that. the idea of absolute immunity, what the former.is saying on a legal basis. >> the president has the kernel of a right principle, the problem is execution. we have immunity in civil cases. we don't know about criminal cases. but the problem is it doesn't apply to anything that a president does. it has to apply to something within the scope of the job. he gave the examples of obama or biden ordering a military strike or border policy, those are obviously within the scope of what you do as president. you would have civil immunity, maybe criminal immunity. the thing donald trump is charged with, the question is are they inside or outside the scope. the prosecutors say they are outside the scope. you cannot be covered for outside of scope because that would lead to coin of phrase, bedlam. >> how is this going to play out. this is an appellate court that could decide any day? >> d.c. circuit court of appeals.

let's break it down with elie honig. let's start with the appeals officially has been filed. what does it tell us? >> i'm going to insist we start with the 14th amendment itself because we have to start with what grounds us. it tells us no person shall hold any office who shall have engaged in insurrection or given aid to the enemies thereof. we are learning now a lot more about how this works. let's look at the arguments now that donald trump makes in his brief. we have a case now trying to get trump inflthrown off. the first argument, there was no insurrection and trump did not engage in any insurrection. now this is really not for the supreme court. this is largely for show. the supreme court does not rehear trials. i they don't make their own independent findings of tact. this is not going to be the basis ultimately for the decision. the second point that trump's team makes, it is up to congress to tell us how to enforce the 14th amendment, not the states. the states can't use different procedures to go about this. in support of that, donald trump's team cites section 5,

panel back with us, and joining us, cnn senior legal attorney from the new york district attorney elie honig, and with us from the southern district office karen and also laura laura, what is being said here, that presidents could very much be prosecuted, but today, they were saying they could not unless they were convicted by the senate. >> clearly, trump's arguments in other forums are coming back to haunt him. and the judges are listening to each other, right. they are seeing what is happening in other cases or forums, and you cannot be inconsistent and disingenuous when you are speaking to the court. so what is excellent and they did a good job of is narrowing issues. there were several issues that were outstanding going into the oral argument, and number one, are the presidents immune from criminal prosecution generally, number one. number two, could double e jeopardy apply, because he was impeached by the house and acquitted by the senate. and does the appellant court have jurisdiction to hear it at all right now, because you have to normally wait until after you are convicted. and num

. >> former federal prosecutor and cnn legal analyst elie honig is here to break down everything thatned. i should note, the funeral he's referring to there is from melania trump's mother. it's happening tomorrow. the judge denied it, and the judge said you don't have to be here, your presence is not required. but just this wild day, the second day of this trial, i wonder what your main takeaways where? >> i read the transcript. three big ones for me. number one, i think e. jean carroll made a powerful showing about her emotional damages that she went through. she laid out for the jury, and taken very compelling fashion, this is what these comments do to me. this is how i suffered. i had sleepless nights, was terrified. number two, i actually think alina habba, she's not a courtroom technician. she all had all kinds of problems delivering evidence, and got lambasted. but on the economic damage, she did a good job on economic damages. she pointed out that e. jean carroll was all but forgotten and unemployed and she came back into the public scene. it's a coldhearted claim, and it may b

but when is still open, an open question. >> elie honig, justice, i like that name. you both for joining tonight. up next on the ice, the source, long-awaited documents have finally been unsealed. names are being revealed of many people who were tied to sex offender jeffrey epstein. after these names have been kept secret for years. also tonight, cnn first speaking with the new house speaker who went to the southern border today, talking about the biden administration's handling of the crisis they, back in a moment. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ getting sick and tired of cold and flu products that don't work? biovanta is the only number one physician-recommended product chosen over all others, including tylenol, mucinex, zicam, and nyquil / dayquil. the combat symptoms and boosts immunity. biovanta really works. getting sick and tired of cold and flu products that don't work? biovanta is the only number one physician-recommended product chosen over all others, including tylenol, mucinex, zicam, and nyquil / dayquil. the combat symptoms and boosts immunity. biovanta really works. >>> y

elie honig is here to lay those all out for us. how the court calendar is going to collide with the campaign on trump's road to try to get the nomination. that's next. ♪ >>> the day after iowa former president trump will be back in a courtroom and this time for his defamation trial brought by e. jean carroll in new york city. it's becoming clear that this election will be contested not only on the campaign trail but also in the courtroom. here to break down the unprecedented array of legal challenges the current republican front runner is facing is the guru, cnn's senior legal analyst, elie honig. elie, the big question here of course is the calendar. there's the election and there are all of these court dates. >> abby, get ready. we've never seen anything like this. there are four pending criminal charges two, of them brought by doj special counsel jack smith, one relating to donald trump's effort to steal the 2020 election, the other relating to classified documents at mar-a-lago. then there's two state level, one in manhattan re

eli honig, how do you think that holds up? >> i think a long shot and probably a losing argument in the court of appeals and perhaps beyond. it's important to understand what he is arguing here. he is not arguing he is immune from prosecution for everything he did during every minute of his four-year presidency. what his team is arguing is he's immune from prosecution for anything he did within the outer scope of his job as president. the problem for donald trump, though, is the facts. donald trump's team claims he was making calls from the white house to legislative leaders, to members of congress, sort of leaves it at that, but that's a myopic view. s donald trump was not trying to neutrally add manufacturing the election. he was trying to steal it, make sure it tipped his way. the weight of the evidence is overwhelming and i think will ultimately doom his argument. >> what will this case before the federal appeals court tomorrow mean for trump's immunity claim in georgia? >> well, the immunity claim i think is one of the we

attorney, elie honig. what's happening in the courtroom? >> things are moving faster than anticipated. e. jean carroll's team has one witness left, her former editor. her testimony lasted an hour and a half to two hours. today, it was 10, 15 minutes. >> do we read into that? >> i think it's that they don't need her full testimony. in the spring, they were talking about several issues, right? there were the allegations of rape, defamation, and damages. here, the jury already decided that trump a ibused e. jean carroll. here, they're looking at a defamatory statement made in 2019. narrow focus for the jury. e jen . jean carroll's lawyers wrapping up the case, introducing exhibits. a deposition before, trump confused e. jean carroll and his ex-wife, marla maples, as well as sort of a press statement. he did not take questions last week, where he attacked the judge and e. jean carroll. they're playing a few exhibits, then it'll be time for the trump defense team to put on their case. the question of the day is will he or won't he testify? >> le

former federal prosecutor, now cnn senior legal analyst elie honig is with us now to talk about this.elie, in summary, what is the argument that trump is making when it comes to maine? >> reporter: so, i just read the brief. it short, it's sort of short on detail. but essentially, the first part of his argument, as he says, i was not engaged in insurrection. then he offers us this sort of list of even if procedural arguments. to when he says, first of all, it's not up to the state. it's up to congress to tell us how this works. then he says, but even if, it's up to the states, maine, in this case, they did not follow their own procedures. the forms that i had to philip didn't say anything about the 14th amendment, and he argues the secretary of state, she was biased and recused. and should've recused herself. then he argues, even if maine properly followed its procedures, i was not given proper due process. he argues this was a sort of abbreviated, quasi-hearing, and i wasn't given enough of the protections that you would need in a hearing like this. and then finally, he argues, even

joined now by former prosecutor elie honig. let me start with you. you are one of the attorneys for donald trump. you are presented with the opportunity to have this go on today with a sick juror. you say no. >> here's why. there are nine jurors. you need a unanimous verdict against you. in order to proceed today, they would be proceeding with less than nine jurors. you have to have at least six in a civil case. if i'm donald trump, i want as many as possible because more jurors means more people who could come back in my favor. if one person is in trump's favor, you're not going to have a verdict. you're going to have a hung jury. is so more jurors, more chances to get a hung jury. let's take the day off and try to get everyone back healthy. we'll come become tomorrow. >> how does it feel to be an attorney in a courtroom like this situation? you got all week to plan. you have been typing up your notes, preparing your speech. >> it's deflating, but if they are prepared, meaning e. jean carroll's attorneys ready to go. they are preparing that trump is

cnn spoke with elie honig about trump's argument in the georgia case. here's his reaction. >> i think this is a real long shot of an argument by donald trump and probably a losing argument in the court of appeals and perhaps beyond. it's important to understand what donald trump is and is not arguing here. he is not arguing that he is immune from prosecution for everything he did during every minute of his four-year presidency. what his team is arguing is that he's immune from for anything in the outer scope of his job as president. the problem for donald trump, though, is the facts. donald trump's team claims he was just making calls from the white house to legislative leaders, cabinet members, to members of congress and leaves it at at that. the reality is quite clear in jack smith's indictment. donald trump was not trying to neutrallied a manipulate ster the election. he was trying to make sure it tipped his way. i think the weight of the evidence here is overwhelming and is going to ultimately doom trump's argument. >> we're six day was from the iow

. >> great to have you here, elie honig. >>> tonight iowa voters ask tough questions of nikki haley andon desantis in back-to-back town halls. >>> the now ex-harvard president speaks out and why she said the push to oust her is a bigger problem. >>> and video of a defendant leaping over a judge's bench to attack her. the new charges he is facing when he is back in court this morning. >>> this just in, cnn is learning that it was the u.s. targeting a proxy group striking the base in baghdad that killed a high ranking commander and another fighter. it comes as militias have ramped up attacks against the u.s. since since october p 7th. natasha bertrand is joining us. what are you hearing? >> translator: this is. >> reporter: this is the second time in a week that the u.s. has targeted iran-backed militias in iraq. this is the second time the u.s. has targeted a leader, we're told the vehicle was the only target here and it killed an associate of the commander of this pro-iran militia. it comes when tensions are high. the u.s. has been retaliating against iran backed proxy groups who have b

. >>> joining us now is senior legal analyst for the southern district of new york elie honig. help us understand how this is different from the maine case in terms of what the appeal is. >> they are in different proceed issues. now it's with the u.s. supreme court. the maine case was ruled on by the secretary of state. that has to go through the maine state court system. >> who said she wants a ruling. she wants someone to weigh in here. >> it's ast interesting factor. usually the side that loses goes to the supreme court asking for the supreme court to take the case. usually, the side that won below says no, you should not take the case because if they don't, whoever wins below, they win. we see most of the people on both sides asking the supreme court formally on the record saying, yes, you should take it. whatever the disagreements have been and certainly will be, everyone agrees on both sides of this. supreme court has to take this. everyone agrees they have to take it quickly. we're under deadlines here almost day by day. >> different posture from trump's legal team that

here's elie honig. >> trump's team took a surprising position that land them in the spot where they were arguing it could be that the president orders murder and c cannot be prosecuted. they invented this argument that first you have to be impeached by the house and convicted by the senate, and only then can you be prosecuted. and i want people the to understand, there's no magic to these formulations. we're in new ground here legally. it's not like there's some code had hidden in the constitution. what the judges are going to be asking is is this workable? if it does, you're out of luck. i don't think trump's lawyers are going to win this. >> the countdown is on to the iowa caucuses. now just five days away, republicans nikki haley and ron desantis will face-off at a cnn debateonight. while donald trump takes part in a fox ne town . >> a n c poll shows haley has closed the gap significantly she's now just 7 pois f the lead. it shows desantis faing to fifth place. she's in iowa using a familiar line about her relationship with trump. >> i believe president trump was the right president a

. >>> joining us is legal analyst and former prosecutor elie honig. welcome back. >> good to see you. >> just to set this up. the former president and his legal team have tried a lot of different arguments in a lot of different places. which is most likely to be compelling in terms of something reaching a high court? >> if we're talking about the 14th amendment, what donald trump does in his brief that he submitted yesterday challenging the maine disqualification is he gives himself a lot of different ways to win. let me play lei out how he structures his argument. he focuses on the procedural side. that's where this is going to be decided. he says it's up to congress, not the states, to tell us how the 14th amendment works. congress has not done that other than passing the criminal law. but then he says, even if it is up to the states, maine did not the follow its own procedures. the secretary of state was biassed. then he goes on to say, well, even if they did properly follow their own procedures, that didn't give me enough due process. they had a h

as our senior legal analyst elie honig noticed this will hinge on whether donald trump can prove that the actions he took were part of his government role as president of the united states and not a campaign role. up until this point, every court that's weighed in on any type of this issue for any person involved with january 6th, either in a civil version or a criminal version, have decided this is not part of any government action. we'll see whether the appeals court feels differently tomorrow. nick valencia bringing us the breaking news. the filing to dismiss the case on immunity grounds in georgia. thank you so much. kate? >> keeping a close eye that. >>> also, a you in lunar mission and already an update today. we just learned that the first american-made spacecraft to attempt a landing on the moon since the apollo program, that mission has suffered what is being called an anomaly. the never-before-flown vulcan rocket launched just a few hours ago. it's carrying what is the first moon lander to launch from the united states since 1972. let's go to cnn's kristen fisher for much mo

elie honig, let me start with you. what do today's opening arguments tell you about the possible damages trump could face? >> i think donald trump's defense argument here is remarkably risky, potentially even reckless and it could backfire quite badly here. let's remember what this jury is deciding is not whether donald trump sexually assaulted and defamed e. jean carroll. the prior jury found that. all this one is deciding is how much money donald trump has to pay now. this is a jury of nine ordinary new yorkers. and essentially what donald trump's team is arguing here is that by defaming her as the prior jury found, he's essentially done her a favor. not only did he not harm her, trump's team argues, but he actually helped her reputation. her economics. i think that's a very risky argument to make. not surprise me at all to see this jury reject that. >> gloria borger, trump chose to be there today. interesting. but he didn't speak outside the courtroom. as he has done on several other occasions when he was attending

. >> less turn to elie honig. how did we get to this point? >> important to remember the trial happening now is the second trial involving e. jean carroll and donald trump. the first trial happened last year, april and may of 2023. same courthouse, same judge. in that case a jury found donald trump liable, a civil case, not a criminal case, liable for sexual abuse, not rape. liable for defamation. and they returned a verdict totaling $5 million. now, this case involves certain defamatory statements donald trump made after he was president. the trial happening now involves similar defamatory statements made while he was president. the reason it was delayed is trump claimed he had immunity because he was president at the time. took time to appeal that. he lost. but that is why we're having a second trial now. in this case, the judge, same judge, said because of the first jury's verdict, sexual abuse not contested. that is established. he sexually abused e. jean carroll. defamation not in dispute. he defamed ef jean carroll. the only question in

also joining us, elie honig. >> think spent about ten minutes going back and forth to try to really contain the questions that would be asked and what trump's answers would be then his testimony was over in less than three minutes. so it was just three straight questions from his attorney. earlier in the day, carroll's team played video clips of trump's deposition in this case where he mistakes carroll for marla maples in a photograph and also just repeats some of his statements that he doesn't know her, calling her mentally ill. so haba asked trump do you stand by your testimony in the deposition. trump says 100% yes. she then asked him did you deny the allegation because miss carroll made an accusation. trump said that's right. she said something i considered a false accusation. totally false. the judge cut him off and said everything stricken from the record. that was really the only time we saw trump veer away. the last question she asked him did you ever instruct anyone to hurt miss carroll. trump said no, i just wanted to defend myself, the family, and frankly, the presidency. the jud

cnn's senior legal analyst elie honig is with us. joining us from atlanta, trump's defense lawyer during his second impeachment trial. it's great to have you. david, let me begin with you, if you were in front of the d.c. circuit, the appellate court and you were arguing this case today for trump, what is the argument you would make? >> there are two primary arguments. the first is under a long-standing case from 1982, nixon versus -- that a president is immune, that's in a civil context. president's immune for actions taken as official actions. he would argue that the actions at issue in the case in d.c. would take in his official capacity as president, based on information he had, he had an obligation to make sure laws are faithfully executed. beca nixon versus fitzgerald says that covers even the outer perimeters of a president's task and, therefore, we don't enter into factual inquiries as to whether it was appropriate judgment or not. the second argument is different. that's his argument that because he was acquitted in the impe

assistant attorney for the southern district of new york, elie honig, who is our cnn senior analyst, karen freeman, a prosecutor for the manhattan district attorney's office. elie, i do want to start with you here. as we said, as we have been talking about, donald trump has been told he cannot deliver closing arguments. any chance they could walk in this courtroom behind me and donald trump's attorneys can say, you know what, we agree to your terms. can donald trump speak now? >> i don't think that's likely at all. here's why. the judge and donald trump's team, we have now learned, have been in a back and forth over the last several days and weeks negotiating this. and the deadline the judge gave donald trump to accept the terms has already passed. i think if they try to pull a surprise and have donald trump stand up, i think the judge is going to say absolutely not. you missed your deadline. i think this is a really important point. you're not allowed to stand up and say whatever you want in court, whether you're a party or a lawyer or some hybrid of those things. no matter who spea

joined now by kara scannell who was at the courthouse today as well as elie honig and criminal defensettorney joey jackson. so what was it like in court, kara? >> today begins with jury selection. you have donald trump in there with e. jean carroll in the same room. they haven't seen each other in decades, and this has been such a major force in trump's life for the past year, with that trial last year too. they're sitting separated by one table. it doesn't appear that they made eye contact at any point. but it was certainly a moment to see them there together. now there was this judge, judge lewis caplan, really runs a tight courtroom. we saw that out of the gate with one of trump's attorneys, sparring with him. she wanted the judge to adjourn the trial on thursday so trump could attend his mother-in-law's funeral. she said i'm not stopping him from going. she said well, you're stopping him from coming here. i already ruled on this argument so we're moving on. the judge did say if trump's defense is ready to rest its case on thursday and trump is in florida, he would let him come to c

according to our elie honig, who we will hear from in a minute. the exchange prompted james pierce, the attorney representing special counsel jack smith to ask, quote, what kind of world are we living in? if that hypothetical holds true. for his part, the former president suggested that losing his case would create, quote, bedlam in the country. what he would not do is answer the following question about any violence that would come with it. >> you just used the word bedlam, would you tell your supporters now, no matter what, no violence? >> [silence] >> in a moment, our political and legal team join us to talk about how it could reshape -- the power of the presidency for generations to come. first, cnn's paula reid with more of this consequential day in court. >> president trump traveled to washington tuesday, to watch arguments in a federal appeals court hearing, over whether he should be shielded from criminal prosecution. >> i feel that as a president, you have to have immunity, very simple. >> trump was not required to be in attendance, but w

elie honig weighed in on whether the court should take up the case. >> this is why we have a supreme court. we have a constitutional issue. what exactly does the 14th amendment mean, how does it work. we don't know the answer. we've never gotten clear guidance on those questions from the constitution itself, from congress or from the supreme court. the stakes are enormous. this will go directly to the heart of our voting process. and we are sing disparity all over the map literally in the way the 14th amendment is being interpreted and applied. the majority of states who have considered these challenges have rejected them, but now we have two, colorado and maine, who upheld them and thrown donald trump off the ballot. so we need a legal answer and we need certainty before the 2024 election. >> all this playing out ahead of the first test of this year's presidential election. the iowa caucuses now less than two weeks away. trump has maintained a consistent lead in the polls there, but rivals nikki haley and governor ron desantis are hoping for a strong showing. kristen holmes reports

joining us to discuss, legal analyst elie honig and tim, a former senior investigative counsel with the house january 6th committee. you have disagreed on this between the two of you over the course -- not on everything. don't give me that face. >> some things. >> disputing elements of this or at least the path forward on this up to this point. based on how you have kind of thought through this over the course of the last several months, when you saw the appeal last night and what was actually in it, do you think it's an effective one? >> i think what's effective about the appeal is that there are a lot of potential off-ramps for the supreme court. i think that's what benefits the former president. the court can get rid of this case without necessarily getting to the core merits that we want to see them talk about. the court could say that the former president is not an officer. that doesn't get to the insurrection question. the court could find that there was process issues with the state court. the court could find all kinds of things that don't get to the core of did president trump

. >> for more on what we can expect today cnn senior analyst elie honig is here.his is totally fascinating. walk us through what's going to happen today. >> a little law school geeking out. here's where we are today. we are at the u.s. court of appeals, federal court of appeals for the d.c. circuit. that's the mid-level court of appeals below the supreme court. the way we got here, of course, is this started out in the district court. the trial level court where donald trump argued he was immune from prosecution because the conduct falls within his scope of the presidency. the district judge tanya chutkan ruled against that. there is no divine right of kings. when we go into court today, these will be the judges who are sitting. judge henderson was put on the bench by george h.w. bush in 1990. judges childs and pan were put on the bench by president biden. there's no tv broadcast of what's going to happen, but there will be a live audio feed, so we'll be able to hear the questioning and oftentimes having done a bunch of these arguments in a three-judge panel, you

j joining me now to discuss is elie honig. after yesterday's civil verdict, does donald trump have a jury problem? >> well, you bet he does, michael, if he behaves like that. i want people to understand what donald trump did in that courtroom throughout this trial is not just unusual, it is absolutely bizarre and self-destructive. when you're a trial lawyer you understand the jury is sitting there feet away watching and evaluating everything you do. you are trained that you have to have a poker face, even if your most important witness goes south or the judge makes a terrible ruling you have to act like you're doing just fine because the jury is watching you and for donald trump to sit there muttering out loud in ways the jury can hear and the judge admonishing him. for him to stand up and walk out during a jury address by the other side is outrageous and i assure you the jury held that against him. if i was his lawyer i would say your penalty for acting out is financial but when we get into criminal court, the penalty will be

.>> let's bring in elie honig, a few minutes to process the verdict, what happens of donald trump continues to go after e. jean carroll and the way he has, and before i get to that, let me ask you another question. the reason he has been found liable for these defamatory statements is because he has been calling her crazy, he has been saying a bunch of clearly pejorative things about her, if he said simply, these charges are not true, would that be defamatory? >> it would be much more difficult defamation case to me, because a person has a right to deny claims, where he went way beyond the line is where he didn't just say i deny that, he called her a liar over and over, he said while the offensive things, quoting her, he said she is not my type and questioned her mental acuity, he went way beyond that. if he kept it to a straightforward denial i think it would've been much more difficult to sue and as to your other question, what happens if and probably realistically when donald trump needs to defame e. jean carroll, the answer is theoretically she can continue to sue him, i don't think e.

assistant attorney, elie honig and former southern district of new york division chief, both appeared before judge kaplan. good morning. thank you, guys, very much for being here . to the brilliant question phil asked you last hour, if trump were anyone else, would he have gotten thrown out of that courtroom yesterday? >> yes, eventually. i do think judge kaplan would have given the warning that he gave, but he probably gave a little longer leash because of all the reasons that we know, the pushback if he is thrown out will be even greater and because judge kaplan is smart enough to know, as you just relayeded, that this is exactly what trump wants. he wants to be thrown out so he can be perceived as the victim, and judge kaplan is smart enough not only to know it but to say it out loud himself. he's the first judge, i think, to really sort of call trump on his bluff in that way. >> and just so people understand, judge kaplan -- i don't know a better word for it -- he's scary. there are 40-some judges in the courthouse. >> terrifying. >> when you went into judge kaplan's courtroom, ok

i want to talk about that monumental case and what it could mean with elie honig, shan wu, and john dean. elie, we are now seeing that the case can -- the high court can move with speed clearly when they want to. i think the question here is how quickly do you think this could be decided? >> well, kaitlan, it's been all-too easy i think over the past three years to criticize the supreme court. i've done it. they've largely deserved it. but i think in this instance, they deserve praise because they've recognized the moment. they've recognized the imperative to move quickly here. first of all, this is absolutely historic. we will get -- for the first time in 150+ years since the amendment was ratified -- some guidance from the supreme court on how exactly the 14th amendment is supposed to work. i think they're going to be studying this decision 150 years in the future. as you said, the court has set an extraordinary tight timeline here. the oral argument is going to be february 8th. that's just over a month from now. i think the supreme court understands that we're seeing these deadlines f

assistant attorney elie honig as well as the deputy chief in the southern district of new york who was the courtroom today. what was it like in that moment when trump stormed out? as roberta kaplan was making her closing argument? >> it was shocking. once he was sitting there about 10, 15 minutes in, he got out when she started going through the lies he had told. i don't know what he expected her closing to look like. she hadn't really deviated from anything that was a theme going on in their case until then. so i don't know if this is something he planned as a stunt or if he really couldn't take the heat. it was a shocking moment. it's not something you expect to see at a trial. >> we saw his attorney, he came back when his attorneys were making their closing arguments come outside of court today. and one of the thing she said that they were stripped of every defense before they walked in there. can you just fact check that comment for us? >> yeah. the liability issue which is what the attorney was talking about was already decided. that was resolved in the first trial back last sprin

. >> let's bring in to the table, to the conversation, cnn legal analyst, elie honig, errol and lee and basil are still with us. we'll get to the immunity stuff, but this filing echoes his language, trying to make arguments and hopes that one sticks with the supreme court. their main argument here, though, that the president, what he did didn't amount to participating in an insurrection, and by the way, if you do this, you will create a chaotic country, which is not a legal argument. how do you expect the supreme court to address this. >> a lot of focus on the phrase, chaos and bedlam, i can't defend the bedlam part of it. the chaos part of it, they say legal chaos, political chaos, and they're right. i mean, we've done the map. we've shown the map. the red states rejected the 14th amendment challenges, the yellow states are the ones where the challenges have failed so far but not finally, and then you have the two blue states. you have colorado and maine that have thrown him off. that is chaotic, and in fact one of the colorado supreme court justices said the dissenters said the proble

. >> along with legal analyst elie honig, the thing i was thinking throughout the course of the day, if a normal person was sitting in that district courtroom doing what trump was doing, what would have happened? >> would have been thrown out. the judge is a no nonsense judge, a zero nonsense judge in that federal courthouse. and to be muttering under your breath continually even after being warned by the judge in a way the jury can hear would get you an escort out of the courtroom. i think judge kaplan is being careful here. he controls his courtroom. i think if donald trump continues to push, that may well happen. you identified the four most important words, i would love that. that's why he's there. nothing could serve his purposes better. i want to be clear, there's some legal strategy happening here. there's no question this is political. just keep in mind, he didn't even go to the first trial, which was really, in a way, higher stakes. now the result of the first trial that he's liable, they carry over to this trial. it's interesting to see the two of them, judge kaplan and two

of course we have elie honig, and also our january 6 committee lawyer. and glad that you are both here. take a step back for a second hoe. because when people hear court, they think either trial and "law & order" or they think the supreme court. this is neither of those moments. this is very specific. what do we expect big picture about why we're here? >> always good to orient ourselves. this is jack myth's federal indictment for election interference based in washington, d.c. and donald trump argued to the trial judge, judge chutkan, that he is immune meaning that he cannot be prosecute the because he claims what he is being charged for fell within the duties as president. judge chutkan rejected that. saying we don't have kings in the country. so now what will happen today is a three judge panel, selected at ran dem from the d.c. circuit, will be asking a series of questions really barraging the lawyer, lawyers will get up there would not at a time, first donald trump's lawyer because he is the one appealing, and he will make his argument and then the q

>> first of all, i am a little bit scared because i saw elie honig beating up george conway the other night and i don't want any part of that. you dominated him. >> we think you can handle it. >> thank you. the primary part of the beginning of their complaint, bare bones complaint to get the process started, to get the appeal going, the main superior court, is one of bias. i don't know where that's going to go in the case. i think the secretary made some inappropriate comments that seemed indicate prejudgment in the case. but quite frankly, there is always a political bias in ballot access issues. justice o'connor wrote about it in one of the landmark cases, cling man versus beaver in 2005. you are dealing with members of a political party who have a certain agenda. i think the substantive issues will be the same ones in colorado, the issue is president included in section 3 of the 14th amendment, does there have to be enabling federal legislation or is it self-executing, griffin's case. you saw in the complaint about whether this arose to the level of insurrection. i think the import

attorney with the southern district of new york elie honig. alyssa, as somebody who worked in the trump white house, i wonder what you made of e. jean carroll there? >> so listen, she's a very compelling person to hear from. i think the way she is speaking to women will resonate, but we have to think about the political, side first i should, say a landmark huge eye-popping sumptuous awarded in getting justice so long after the fact. we know sexual assault is widely under reported and so much later to get justice. but i do not know this has a political impact, the reason i say this is this. if you turn to right-wing media, this is not getting covered, you would be hard-pressed to even find that the settlement came down. i think that aside from nikki haley actually seeing the jury was right and commenting on, it it is really making it it to -- it is important for the country, it is important she's getting justice. >> trump who had been truly talking about aging hair nonstop denied knowing, her saying everything for months, now ever since he was

with us to explain all of it elie honig at the magic wall. appeals, an appeal, two appeals, we have to wait and see, just to step back. what's the landscape right now in this new year? >> yeah, phil. the 14th amendment section 3 has gone from relative constitutional obscurity to the spotlight very quickly. let's remind ourselves what it says. no person shall hold any office who have engaged in rebellion or aid or comfort to the enemies thereof or caused insurrection. it seems fairly straight forward. the problem it is being interpreted and applied very differently across the map. let's look at the current status quo. these six states rejected challenges, efforts to try to remove trump from the ballot. some still being appealed, arizona and west virginia. these 11 states we had challenges to trump's eligibility brought, but then withdrawn by the challengers for reasons that are varied. now, we have, of course, now two states, colorado and maine, who decided trump is off the ballot. he committed insurrection. 14th amendment applies. we could se

attorney for the southern district of new york, elie honig. alyssa, as someone who worked in the trump white house, i wonder what you made of e. jean carroll there. >> so listen, she's a very compelling person to hear from. i think that the way she's speaking to women will resonate, but what we have to think about from the political side, first i should say a landmark huge eye-popping sum she was awarded and getting justice so long after the fact, we know sexual assault is wildly underreported and so much late toor get justice. i don't know this has a political impact. the reason i say this is this, if you turn to right-wing media, it is crickets. you would be hard pressed to find that the settlement came down. i think aside from nikki haley actually saying the jury was right and commenting on it, it's barely making it into the right of center blood stream, but it's important for the country. it's important she's getting justice. >> trump, who had been truly talking about e. jean carroll nonstop, denying knowing her, saying everything he's bee

. >> elie honig, justice john dean, i like that name. thank you both for joining tonight. >>> up next here on "the source," long-awaited documents have finally been unsealed. names are being revealed of many people who were tied to sex offender jeffrey epstein after these names have been kept secret for years. >>> also tonight, a cnn first. speaking with a new house speaker who went on the southern border today, talking about the biden administration's handling of the crisis there. back in a moment. >>> four years of anonymity for jeffrey epstein's friends and his business partners is ending at this hour tonight here at 9:00 on the east coast as hundreds of court documents have now been unsealed. that includes revelations from depositions of women who once worked with the notorious sex trafficker. the revelation just coming out involves a woman, claims that jeffrey epstein made startling comments about former president bill clinton, just one of the many powerful people expected to be named here. cnn's senior crime and justice corresponde

i wish we had elie honig to lay out the trial dates and how it will actually move because the realitytion comes down and one of the major trials. so what he would be talking about is some unprecedented move it to pull the nomination away from a nominated candidate. standing at some kind of convention, it would be an unprecedented event that no party is for -- parrot >> that's not going to happen. he's going to milwaukee as a convicted felon. nobody is going to take it away from him. >> my point b, if a conviction which will come after the convention, this is where the waiting in the wings doesn't make sense. a very few legal minds think that this is going to be tried and convicted without an appeal before their july convention. >> listen, i think it'll academic as well because, as everyone around this table, knows this race is not going to be millions of votes. this is going to come down again to 100, 200,000 votes in a few states. what is going to happen in macomb county michigan? what's going to happen in erie county, pennsylvania? there are a few places in the united states, in pen