the famous british economist john case called the treaty of versailles likening rome's allies and ententiahich once razed to the ground carthage they defeated. they thirsted for blood. first of all, they wanted german territory; they did not think that the germans could not cope with reparations. then we can tear away part of the german lands, but this only gave rise to a wave of hatred, the british held them back, and the french did not take this into account. they wanted to finish off, finish off, humiliate, and did not despise the germans, so germany was crushed. this is very used in his speeches. then hitler he says, well, that’s it, we’ve taken away from germany, we don’t have anyone, nor the means of subsistence of our army, what else do you want from germany , hitler shouted peace to the masses of ordinary germans, didn’t bring a simple worldly well-being. the german economy lay in ruins, the number of the poor grew, as in the war, the germans were forced to save. that's all, wearing shirt-fronts instead of shirts , drinking coffee from acorns and smoking cigars from dried cabbage l

edwards case, i think is it necessarily have those issues right? the johnre about the facts than whether that was for a campaign of violation and whether or not an inappropriate campaign violation, here it has a similar legal issue, but it also has an additional legal issue because this is a prosecution, and there is questions about whether federal campaign counts as the crime that -- falsifying a business record from a misdemeanor to a felony. >> so, everyone, says because it is a two tier process if you, will that is a felony, people who suppose they -- that the campaign finance piece is what elevates it to a felony, there are other potential crimes that could be sided, that would elevated to a felony. are there not be on the campaign finance? >> yes, they're absolutely, are i use an analogy of a burglary, so a burglary is a chess pass, and that is a trespass, that is not a misdemeanor. what turns a trespass into a burglary, is if one you go and have the intent to commit a crime while you are in there, you don't necessarily have to prove the, crime they d

for both of those issues, the john edwards case, i think that it did not necessarily have those issues the facts, and whether that was for a campaign violation, weather or not to have a inappropriate campaign violation. here, it has a similar legal issue, but it also has a other legal issue. this is the state court prosecutions, and the questions about whether or not a federal campaign counts as the crime that is falsifying a business record from a misdemeanor to the felony. >> everybody says that it's a two tiered process to escalated to a felony. people have supposed, ideation campaign finance pieces when elevates it to a family. there are other potential crimes that could be cited it would elevated to a felony. are there not be on the campaign fight -- >> there absolutely are. i used an analogy of a burglary. in a burglary, it's a trespassing. you knowingly enter and remain unlawfully somewhere. it's not trespassing, that's a misdemeanor. with turns it into a burglary, when you go in, you have the intent to commit a crime in there. you don't necessarily have to prove the crime, you

. >> that john edwards case the payments were made by a donor. a donor.hat means campaign finance laws are invoked. despite that, they still found that the payments were not made exclusively for the purpose of the campaign. and, therefore the justice department dismissed that case. this was done with personal money, george, that's the key distkeydisdistinct feature it. would have been made irrespective of the candidates' campaign. it's outside campaign finance. >> bret: do you buy that. >> i think that's correct. i don't think it would qualify as a campaign expenditure include it as a campaign. the key is that the john edwards case was a stronger case and the department of justice put everything it had on that case and one of the reasons they likely passed on this. i think everyone agreed that there is no way on everett that this case would have been brought for anyone other than donald trump. this is bragg's manifest destiny. this is what bragg said he was going to do. and he found a rare curious way to publish it. >> gentlemen, we appreciate it. we will

case elsewhere? >> yeah, they sure are, john. licity surrounding this high profile case. but just minutes ago here in the federal courthouse behind me his lawyer announced she was planning to file a change of venue motion in the next few weeks. that will be followed up by a hearing in may. also just moments ago in court, federal prosecutors told the judge that the defense now has all of the discovery in this case, including, of course, that bodycam video shot by arriving police officers that captured the moment depape swung a hammer into paul pelosi's head last other, viciously hitting his skull, and using a hammer to break into the home through a glass door and heard his confession during a taped interview with police in which he candidly laid out his plan to kidnap, then speaker nancy pelosi, and even break her kneecaps if need be. david depape faces, i'm sorry, he appeared in court in an orange jail jump suit shackled at the ankles. he faces felony kidnapping and assault charges here in federal court. while in the parallel case

new cnn reporting that trump's team and something we've heard them bring up many times is the john edwards case. of course, he was accused of soliciting. i believe it is not a million dollars to hide an affair. the question, i think is, is that actually a comparison? that is. that really measures up to this. there are yeah. i mean, there are some similarities but also some differences and what the trump team is focusing on when they look at the john edwards case is that he was acquitted on some of these charges, and then the judge declared a mistrial and others where the jury couldn't reach a verdict. the department of justice decided not to move forward. that was a federal case. this is a local prosecutor is unclear. exactly what type of charge bragged might move forward with if he does decide to bring a case and if there may or may not be a parallel there, but the key thing that the trump team is pointing to hear that they look as a parallel to edwards is that they're arguing that this was this payment was made to avoid embarrassment. and it was not made primarily for the campaign katelyn pol

my understanding going back to john edwards case, john edwards was able to get off in part because hes hunter to hide it from his wife, not to win the election kenneth trump have the same defense if they can prove he knew about the payment. >> that's entirely correct, he has to come in and say he was paying to save his marriage she did not want to cause embarrassment to his family there was no intent to do anything about the election, you look at some of the other things trump has been involved with it is credible he was not looking to maliciously break the law but looking to save his marriage and save his family. maria: kemps trostle and the journal says it looks at you not only to splash and but do so with the most pathetic of legal arguments this is not a case of classified documents in the case of transfer of power he wants to jail a former president over the heading on a long-ago business payment, the feebleness of the charge. >> what is disgusting i have a client who is physically attacked and hate crime in new york city. alvin bragg did not do anything it took the d.o.j. to get

case with personal funds? of course, not. no one's ever been prosecuted for that. the closest we've got was john edwards back in the day when a donor paid $900,000 for his mistress and the child to be housed somewhere. that case was ultimately dismissed by the department of justice after they couldn't get a conviction and that was with the donor. the distinction is so vast and it's clear to anyone whether you are in support of donald trump or don't like anything about donald trump, we should all be concerned as citizens in this country about weaponization. in all my years as prosecutor i have never seen the discretion like this. >> we have no idea what the charges are. >> well -- no, i have an idea. >> would you advise a client to personally attack a prosecutor like this? it's dehumanizing, mr. tacopina. >> you know, chuck, i know. again, i'm not his social media consultant. i don't -- i think that was an ill-advised post that one of his social media people put up and he quickly put down the rhetoric in the photo -- >> you're only referring to the baseball bat. he didn't take down the other rhet

effectively charge a federal offense, turley said, this is a case that will be high, made for tv prosecution, high in ratings but short on the law. that johnerful case to accuse him and to find that edwards was wronged this case is so flflimsy in pretext. he could say, i paid money, i didn't want to go through embarrassment. this case could -- do you think this could be o won on appeal? >> yes. it is a silly case. i don't think it has any hope of survivor an appeal. like dc, you will probably find a jury in new york that hates donald trump. but, this is also just one of many legal attacks on the former president. we have one in georgia over election alleged interference. we also have the special council looking into alleged mishandles of classified documents, that is all blown up in their face. joe biden has done much worse allegedly, they found now i think classified documents at 4 different locations, they just found them in his lawyer's office in boston, they found them in his home in his messed up gar an,age and office and university of pep pen pennsylvania office. they found documents to trace back to his senate days, which is more pe

the clearance norman case, the john doe case, the richard left man case. i have cataloged on the just security website all of the presidents in new york with this kind of a books and records violation is bumped up to a felony where there's an intent to cover up a camera. jeanne finance. it's important jessica right to challenge some of those things that are being stated as fact out there when, when, in fact, they're not fact based on absolutely and there are so many people so many republicans, especially rushing to donald trump's defense right now normal. i want to stay with the legal aspect of this for just one second, because there's been a lot of talk about these 30 plus charges really zeroing in on that number of 30 plus charges. what do you make of that? and is there any significance there? well, we know that each one of these 11 checks jessica by themselves could constitute a separate counts in an indictment and, uh , there's associated, uh, record keeping that goes with each one of those checks that could also constitute each one. a separate books a

>> you know, john, in these cases certainly hate to get ahead of ourselves in these investigations.re are a couple things that kind of jump out at me. one is that this woman was carrying two assault weapons, you know, with her, which means kind of in the intent and plan around this. i would not expect those were just sitting in the back of a vehicle or rarely accessible in the moment she came upon the school. and perhaps knowledge of where the door was to come in. unless we find out later other attempts were made trying to get into the school and happened to find that door open, kind of what happened down in uvalde where the door was propped open or found to be open. so this seems to be a little bit more intimate knowledge, i would say, more focus on the school as opposed to just driving down the street and finding another school that may have been available. part of a church, school was in kind of a combined with it from what we understand physical layout of it. so i think there are some things here that are going to give us some connection to the school, whether it was intimate an

. >> but the -- john edwards avoided conviction in a comparable case. hn edwards did not testify. >> brian: do you think same judge that presided over the grand jury that was the judge overseeing the case and trial of the trump organization and put the cfo at rikers island? >> he will almost certainly oversee the arraignment. so much time gets passed and time between arraignment and trial. >> ainsley: what happens to trump between arraignment and trial behind bars? >> no. >> steve: given the dynamics being so largely in favor of joe biden in the last election, could donald trump get a fair trial in new york? >> it's going to be very challenging. the judge, his lawyers will seek extremely broad discretion, extremely broad latitude in questioning jurors for potential bias. and the judge should grant that very broad latitude. >> brian: and the timing would be after the 2024 election by the time the jury is said and this gets on the calendar. do you agree with that. >> could be before the 2024. typically case goes to trial in a year march 2024. theaterly hap

. >> this has echoes of john edwards case.nk what it tells you that jurors take a common sense approach. no matter what arguments the prosecutors put out there, the jurors look at the conduct and they say, look, what really was going on here. we want to get to the bottom of this, we want to do justice and we don't necessarily agree with the story that the prosecutor is spinning and that's the conclusion in the john edwards reached and may be the case that result that the jurors in a potential trump case reach. liz: you guys were terrific tonight, thanks for helping us out. >> thank you. liz: the federal reserve kicked off two-day meeting. it's dealing with major economic issues, inflation, bank closures, will they raise rates and by how much and could that clobber banks even more and your wallets, edward lawrence live at the white house. >> we are talking about the market believes 25 basis points will be the move tomorrow but we were talking two weeks ago about 50 basis points. so the landscape of all this has changed. meanwhi

the most similar case i am aware of is the john edwards case. that was a while ago.get. a conviction. is not the same but a little similar. it makes it so much easier for people to say it is a political witchhunt. it is not a clear crime that we have visual evidence of. amna: we know most republicans, even before this indictment, most republicans said they wanted him to be president again. does this make him stronger? does it make it tougher for president biden's reelection campaign? karen: in the short-term, this will help donald trump, primarily because the republican base is going to rally around him. but beyond that, nobody can predict. if this case does fall apart in court, that helps trump enormously. the fact is, for people to hear over and over again about hush money to a porn star, in the long run is pretty corrosive. amna: i went back and read president ford's remarks when he delivered the pardon for president nixon. the country had been throh controversy and a divisive debate. he said in a trial, ugly passions would again be aroused in our people would be

why is this case different than the john edwards case? well, first of all, i am familiar with the giant neighborhoods case. the top prosecutor in the justice department and i rolled prints from my white house stays with president clinton. the defense lawyer, abby lowell, who represented john edwards, so let me tell you what the law is there in there's been misstated, even by my old friend joe tacopina, who i've worked with not on this matter. i wish him well, but i don't wish his client will the law says any political motivation. it can be 1% not primary political motivation, so a jury is going to have to decide. do they believe donald trump waiting until the very end in october with two weeks left in the election? suddenly deciding? okay it's time, michael. you pay the money, but i don't want to be connected with it, but i'll reimburse you and that's the word that the prosecutors in new york said reimbursed or reimburse you afterwards for the $130,000. will the jury believe donald trump that he had no idea that it would influence the ele

watergate prosecutor who turned down a chance to represent donald trump in the mar-a-lago documents case. johnreciate your time and welcome. i know you know robert costello. i gave acquit headline of him. he's represented people like steve bannon, rudy giuliani. some people make judgments about that as they well. what could you tell us about him, wha t kind of lawyer he is, his character? >> well, i think we need to be careful about equating a lawyer with -- whether it's a good thing, or bad thing. so, robert costello four starters is a former assistant u.s. attorney. in the southern district of new york. warm also part of that. office he has an excellent reputation. he did as a prosecutor. he did as a defense. lawyer he's honorable, of the lawyer. and i have no doubt, zero, but i want to say double negative but he wouldn't lie under oath. >> oh. ahead >> whatever he brings to the table, i don't think he has an agenda other than to tell the truth. >> this is significant, because obviously a lot can be resting on him, he did come out after his three hours at the grand jury and spoke to -- he sa

classified documents, evan corchoran's eyewitness in the classified documents, case but his counsel to trump, and the john six case. i mean it is, seems to be, not a lawyer. it seems like a nightmarish arrangement when you talk about counsel and multiple probes who were cross pollinating things as councils are witnesses. >> yeah, the only thing surprising to me that i could see the diagram is of their five -- get involved in these. cases with the former president. i think trump has done the masterfully at. times it's a way of putting a buffer between him in the law when he oftentimes has lawyers you can see that with michael cohen sort of how we handled him and what went on when he asked him to do. and we now have a story wound up there. and even here, mr. corchoran, he is writing a letter as opposed to trump giving the letter, trump side of the certification. cars that is fact his property, his residency, but the lawyer did. it he bills them these degrees of separation. and when you try to delay things, -- and inquiries and everything else. he just makes the not of it. bigger and it took more strands and

case with personal funds? of course, not. no one's ever been prosecuted for that. the closest we've got was johnfor his r mistress and the child to be housed somewhere.çó that case was ultimately dismissed by the department of justice after they couldn't getá a conviction and that was with the distinction hereúr so vasvvq and it is clear to anyone, whether you are in support or donald trump or detractor or don't like anything about donald trump, we should al4 country about the weaponizationñ that is what this is,n! s discretion like this. >> you say that, but we have no idea what the charges are yet.ed >> well -- no, i have an idea. >> would you advise a client to personally attack a prosecutor i mean, it's lesusp'izing, mr. tacopina. know.úa. again, i'm not his social media consultant.i] i don't -- i think that was an ill-advised post that one of his social media people put up and ■ he quickly took it down when he realized the hotoric in the >> you're only referring to the baseball bat. he didn't take down the other rhetoric. wait a minute. wait a minute. wait a minute. you're referring to the

obviously when the fbi showed up in search mara lago, that was not the case, john, not the case. sara murray appreciate that important. update. elliot williams still with us at the table. so piercing attorney client privilege is a big deal. you have to reach a high bar of credibility there. you think it's even more consequential. we're talking about the notes here because what you're trying to did did was donald trump using his lawyers essentially to lie to the government about what he still had in his possession. people lie notes. don't lie the words that people write down, uh, in in the moment. are valid and useful record. and so yes, it is absolutely useful for them to turn over whatever paper or documentation he has at the time, but again like you, said, john, it's so profound because they have presented evidence that they believe that the former president committed a crime. and that's not the second time that's happened once in california and once here that is significant significant again. mr corporate must testify tomorrow we'll see what it's grand jury, but we'll see what

that's what we expect the defense to argue, john. >> john: yeah, but the prosecution has to make the case that he's lied about everything else, why wouldn't he be lying about this. so, we'll keep following it and see where the closing arguments go and then the jury deliberations. john, thanks for the update, appreciate it. gillian. >> gillian: let's bring in criminal defense attorney mark eiglarsh, thanks for being with us. so the judge allowed the jurists to travel about 40 minutes to that colleton county property, the crime scene where the murdaugh's lived. these kinds of viewings of crime scene properties are always fraught with a lot of risk for the defense. we heard nancy grace on last hour talking about the risks of mistrial, only takes one guy with a sign standing along the roadway to derail this entire thing. how do you think it went today? >> well, visiting the crime scene pales in comparison on the risk factor to putting your client on the stand so they are taking a lot of risk us because they have to. you get caught at the brutal lie like you were not at the criminal scene and

you may remember former presidential candidate john edwards. the case echos the one tried against trump. edwards was charged with funneling $1 million in campaign donations to hunter, his mistress and with whom he later admitted had a love child. it was a federal case, not local. prosecutors claimed he used that money to try to conceal the affair forvoters. edwards claims the funds were a gift and not trying to hide the affair during the campaign from his wife who later died of cancer. it acquitted edwards on one of the counts and prosecutors dropped the charges and declined to even retry him. gillian, back to you. >> eric shawn, thank you. >> john: let's bring in constitutional law attorney jonathon turley. does it look on the surface, what alvin bragg is doing, as a criminal prosecution or a political prosecution? >> i'm afraid it is a political prosecution. whatrd to escape that conclusion. previous prosecutors rejected this claim, decided not to move on it, including the department of justice. what he is trying to do is to bootstrap a state misdemea

says it is likely to happen. >> john: remember the last big case, high-profile case when this happened with john edwards when he was accused of using campaign funds to cover up his affair. that was in federal court. where campaign finance violations are usually tried. he was found not guilty on one count. the jury deadlocked on five others and the justice department didn't retry him and it went away. the new york case is really unusual. >> dana: looks like it is happening, john. >> john: we'll see where it goes from here. always interesting to watch. spring break shootings leaving two people dead on miami beach. prompting the city to impose a curfew. the third year in the row that miami beach has had to do that. the gunfire erupted friday and saturday night. more coming up in the next hour with miami beach mayor. >> dana: financial lifeline. ubs agrees to buy credit suisse. will this calm fears over the stability of the banking sector? money man and my friend charles payne are coming up. alarming surge of people on the f.b.i. terror watch list trying to cross our border. the stunning n

not surprisingly, john edwards was acquitted in that case. it was a humiliating defeat for the obama administration but also sent a clear message and sent a precedent which alvin bragg is apparently ignoring. we don't know what the federal indictment says. if trump is indicted for sending money to stormy daniels, well, you'll be watching the abuse of law enforcement power. oh, but you can't complain about it, because as congresswoman maxine waters has explained, political protests staged on behalf of donald trump aren't constitutionally protected. they're domestic terrorism. >> this is donald trump sending messages out to domestic terrorists that he's worked with and he helped to organize for the invasion of the capitol on january 5th, he's sending out a message to them to get ready to protest any arrests, indictments, etc. that he may have. so he's basically talking to the proud boys, to qanon and kkk. >> tucker: oh, january 6th. the only real organized group on january 6th was the fbi, of course. consider the side and where it's coming from

. >> john: in case folks at home missed the top of it, when the spokesman for the nashville police department came up and described this, there was a call put in from the school, there was no school resource officer present at the school, it's a private school, it doesn't employ anybody from the nashville police department to look after the school. when police arrived, apparently just moments after the school was put in, they entered the first floor of the school and they began clearing that first floor. they then heard shots coming from the second floor, it was a team of five officers who entered the school, made their way up the stairs. they got to the top of the stairs, observed a female shooter, heard shots continuing to ring out. two of the five officers immediately engaged the shooter and took her down. so you can imagine if they hadn't been so swift in getting there, if there had been any kind of a delay, how much worse this could have all been, sandra. >> sandra: reunification is still happening there on the ground, parents arriving at the scene to meet up with their children. jonatha

why we have a precedent for this case former senator john edwards indicted. he was not convictd that is true but this is in the an unpresidented case >> it is george. he was only not convicted that was a federal prosecution he is i federal campaign election loss that was federal who bis dismiddle the case the difference was this john edwards case the payments were made boy a donnar campaign finance laws invoked. they found the paymentless were not med for the purposes of come pain and the justice department dismissd that case. fec did not proceed they found no violation. i spoke to brad low smith and said there was no violation of come pain finance laws the justice department did not proceed in this case against the president there is no precedent this was done with personal money that is the key factor. when it it is with personal money the law says this, if the payment was made with personal funds and they would have been made irrespective of the campaign it is outside of come pin financials. that's when you have. >> that may not be what michael cohen will t

it did that in the john edwards case and it was a disaster. this is a very difficult crime to prove and this is weaker than the edwards case. >> shannon: we're hearing the president's team we aren't even going to discuss a plea. we will go to the mat. we'll have to watch over the next year or two if he is actively campaigning and also doing a trial, if he was your client, what would you tell him about taking the stand and how that will play with the jury? i have to imagine he is going to want to. >> i have no idea what the facts are. i haven't read the indictment. to the professor's point i don't know if it's 34 independent fact patterns or 34 bad checks written on the same day or if they're just counting or stacking the counts of the indictment. we just saw a trial in south carolina where a defendant insisted on taking the stand but not with a great result. so ultimately it is the client's decision but that is so far down the road, you have statute of limitations problems, you have real legal issues with this indictment. shannon, my concern i

and that's problem that they had in the john edwards case. that was a much stronger case.ey lost, ultimately, because these are very difficult cases to make out. now, you take that and is now you have the manhattan t.a. taking a case to -- d.a. taking a case to court that the department of justice declined to do. and that raises some obvious questions. rachel: right. obviously alvin bragg has trump derangement syndrome or wants to raise his profile. how does this end for donald trump, in your view? >> well, you know, this is going to now get pretty wicked on all sides is. i mean, you've got a person who's running for the white house. this could easily extend to the election are. but there are a number of flaws in this case. it is based on section 175 dealing with falsified business records. they need to actually federalize the case in the sense of hooking into that alleged federal violation. the reason is i think bragg is out of time. the statute of limitations is about to who years on -- two years on this offense. that has already run. you can extend it to five years if y

additional deaths due to the disease occurred after the devastating mix and the number of suspected cases. john to more than 500 and these numbers are more likely to increased in the upcoming days. as big catastrophe is still hasn't completely subsided. so i had on al jazeera french president. i don't know cron on the you pledge aid to the eastern democratic republic of congo where hundreds of thousands of people have been forced from their homes. plus, former us president donald trump addresses the crowd of conservatives in maryland. the contest to select the republican party, 2024 presidential candidate. what's up ah, in depth analysis of the days headlines from around the world to try right extremely there is real and need to be tackled as soon as possible informed opinions. why is the sale of position concerned about this rather small between turkey, anthea, lose them on the really with 30 this is and so forth. frank assessment, you know, that was a joke about the interim government that it's not interact with, nor does it got inside story on al jazeera. ah, the health of humanity is at sta

i think what they're targeting is the idea of campaign finance violations but remember the john edwards caseively demonstrated how weak that claim is. in fact, b when i was attorney general, the southern district of new york looked at that violation and determined there was no crime that was committed. on federal law, the feds are the experts. they determined this isn't a crime. again, you're right, the statute in both misdemeanor and felony has run, most likely. maria: house speaker kevin mccarthy is ordering the house to investigate whether federal funds were being used during bragg's investigation. president trump claims that president biden stuffed the new york city da office with doj personnel from washington. i want to get your the take on that, matt. but lee, weigh in on that and a assess this. what do you make of all this? >> it's a political prosecution. and when there is a federal campaign that is going on, you have investigations that might be conducted by the federal elections commission, the fec. if there are federal crimes, maybe there would be an expression the department of j

the only other precedent that is remotely close was the john edwards case that was prosecuted by federal authorities it was prosecuted because there was a donor involved as opposed to using personal funds like here somehow, a state prosecutor who doesn't have jurisdiction over elections is prosecuting the case this was a personal resolution for a personal matter that would have been made irrespective of the campaign >> my challenge with that, my problem with that, neal, and you're the real lawyer here, that the payment was not just, hey, let me give you some money and get reimbursed that was a part of what was apparently a catch and kill scheme that the national enquirer, a mr. pecker being the head of the national enquirer, his organization already admitted this scheme existed rolling stone reported in 2021, american media inc. which is mr. pecker's company, unlawfully aided trump in 2016. they found they had violated federal election laws by making a payment to playboy model karen mcdougal in order to purchase and bury a story about an alleged 2006 affair with trump pecker enters a non

john that is important to remember. these lawyers who are under scrutiny themselves are still involved in defending these cases. very enmeshed in. >> john: it is an odd, odd thing. congressman, often for the last several th years when this happened i would trump base react to this? i don't thing that is a relevant question anymore. we have been asking it for so long. i am curious is there are people running against him or about to run against him for president. what goes on in this campaign headquarters of other candidates? how do they look at all these things going on? what they look at it, john, with absolute fear. hopefully, this is the candidate speaking. hopefully, organically this will affect donald trump. but if i will take off his base. i will anger them. so i might just use the old what is this case your speaking of, i have never heard of it. i thing that is one way. there is a line either a nikki haley or mike pence stepping up in this area to put that altogether and say it is not just abandoning ukraine it is also this lawless issue. and throw in politics of do you thing an indicted former president c

the only other one is the john edwards case, it was prosecuted because there was a donor involved aspposed to personal funds. a state prosecutor is prosecuting this case. this was a personal resolution for a personal matter that would have been made irrespective of the campaign >> what do you think of that defense? >> he has some points. there's enough for the indictment to get to probable cause. this is a defensible case. people need to be prepared for that he has been on the air making his points a lot of them that he got from mark pomerantz's book. this is a defensible case because there may be an issue as to whether or not new york can use a federal election law violation as a predicate they won't be prosecuting it so much they kind of will. because they're going to be using it to bump up what would ordinarily be a misdemeanor to a felony falsification of records is a default misdemeanor. it's document heavy. we have seen the checks, the agreements between david dennison and patty peterson or whatever the phony names were. that's probably easier to make the misdemeanor. to bump i

remember what's different about the john edwards case? the payments were largely made before even the primary season, a year before presidential year, you did not have the threat of the person coming out to actually air the story, which is a very different scenario. and remember, you say they were, you know. is it a good case for him? but it hang on some counts in doj opted not to try to go back in it, so it's very, very different. but finally, this all might be for not tacopina, because, remember if you're talking about whether he'll actually be counseled earlier in the week and last we heard of about a potential conflict of interest. elliot you know the one tacopina used to represent stormy daniels. now will he be in some parts. will he be thrown off the case? i don't think it's likely. i think more likely he's going to just be walled off from stormy daniels. and the last thing we've been hearing from donald trump's lawyers is this is all political. this is all about getting trump. let's take a quick listen at that. it's a case that sho

that is what two sources familiar with the case against donald trump. tell her johnmiller about tonight's indictment. before the break. our evan perez reported that a court date has been set for this coming tuesday when donald trump is expected to turn himself in in manhattan and to give you some idea of the gravity of the former president situation our next guest. one of his attorneys has already given testimony to a grand jury hearing a different case. one of at least three others we know of timothy parla . torrey joins us now, mr parla, tory. thank you so much for joining us again. you're not representing him in this matter, but what is your reaction? to president trump, former president trump being indicted. well it was kind of a surprise, obviously, the timing of it, but, you know, the new york county district attorney, it's an office that i've gone against many times. i served my career in new york city, and they have often brought in my experience cases that they really shouldn't have seen them in doubt. many cases that i am later you know, taking into dismiss

criminal defense attorney phil holloway, here to break down the latest twists and turns in this case. >> john: republican lawmakers pushing forward with their parents' rights bill, meant to help parents who say they have been demonized by school officials and labelled domestic terrorists. will the bill make it to the president's desk? there is the crux. douglas murray weighs in coming up next. >> like every other institution in america, schools must be accountable. and this bill will ensure that accountability to the people who matter the most. ople are workino build a better future. so we're hard at work, helping them achieve financial freedom. we're providing greater access to investing, with low-cost options to help maximize savings. from the plains to the coasts, we help americans invest for their future. and help communities thrive. okay everyone, our mission is complete balanced nutrition. together we support immune function. supply fuel for immune cells and sustain tissue health. ensure with twenty-five vitamins and minerals, and ensure complete with thirty grams of protein. >> sandra:

john. >> john: we'll watch this case. it is fascinating.. >> dana: a new warning for americans over the rise of a street drug, a deadly combination of fentanyl and animal sedative. the dea has trafficking has become more widespread and it is killing users at an alarming rate. let's get to ann milligram who joins me now and you are sounding the alarm. now more widespread and actually even more deadly. explain to people how that happens. what physically happens to you if you take one of these drugs. >> thank you, dana for having me. we just put out a public safety alert because we've looked at all the fentanyl that was seized in the united states last year by the dea and found that 23% of the fentanyl powder that we seized has xylazine in it. an animal tranquilizer and a sedative. what it does is makes a deadly drug, even more deadly. it depresses your respiratory system or breathing. it is devastating. so we've seen this go up enormously in 2022 and it is now in almost all 50 states, in 48 states. every state other than south dakota and wyom

if the sec wins the case we talked about john deaton, ripple case of sale of xrp, the sec can go afterred securities. they trade through exchanges. what he is positing, what he is going to posit in a likely lawsuit, he hasn't filed yet, put out a release about an investigation, if you're an exchange transact these things you're aiding abetting illegal transfer of a illegal coin essentially and that is where this thing gets really funky. what is interesting about class action lawsuits, again a lot of them are bs. cheryl: not all of them. >> you're right. some of them have incredible impact. i remember the enron class-action lawsuits against enron, brought in big firms, citigroup was involved, first boston, they were all involved, those things got billions of dollars out of the companies. they set precedent. they led to major stories about this stuff. and again, it was done, those were done i about milberg weiss, ironically at the time was later on. but, it set, it had an impact. tom grady who is the tom brady -- cheryl: you still want to say tom brady but you're doing a really good job.

case closely really for years now. randi, before the defense gave their closing arguments there was a juror dismissed. what happened? >> well, johnthis juror was dismissed for speaking with other people about the case, not fellow jurors but just other people and every day in the court the judge reiterates to the jury to not discuss the case. he spoke with the lawyers about it and law enforcement interviewed the people this juror spoke with, and after reviewing recordings of those interviews with those people, the judge decided to dismiss that juror, so he called that juror into the courtroom today. made her aware she was being dismissed and replaced her with an alternate. >> what was the final point that the defense made to the jury? >> reporter: the defense really in their closing argument was trying to explain away the state's most powerful piece of evidence, that's that video recording pulled from paul murdaugh's cell phone. it's the kennel video as it's come to be known. it was recorded at 8:44 p.m., just a few minutes before prosecutors believe that maggie and paul murdaugh were killed. al alex murdaugh is heard on that reco

>> john: an old, cold case now heating up.outh carolina authorities are now considering the death of one of buster murdaugh's former high school classmates back in 2015 to be a homicide. the bombshell announcement coming weeks after the alex murdaugh double murder trial wrapped up. jonathan serry is live in the sout southeast bureau. >> they put fresh eyes on it. an attorney retained by the victim's family held a phone conversation with the chief of sled, the south carolina law enforcement division. the two agreed to conduct a joint investigation putting those fresh eyes on the 2015 case initially ruled a hit and run. state investigators plan to be present in and when steven smith east body is exhumed. they want an independent autopsy. >> it is important to me because i just love my son and since i couldn't protect him, i will fight for him. >> his body was found on a country road 15 miles from the hunting estate of alex murdaugh who was convicted of murdering his wife and young son. he was a classmate of buster, murdaugh and

e1 so this case has bothxd of thos issues, in the john edwards cas?gn finan piece elevatesfá it toc a felon. other potential crimesv cited that could elevateq it to felony? ñ155jjjy why did they structure thew3 payments, there wereok 11 different payments, whyxdxd diq% structure them overt( timefá ify weren'tfá trying to hide it. then he was elected. you can make a strong argument that this was for the purpos karen, thank youqÑi so much for your expertise and your wisdom. >> thank you for having me. >>> we have much more ahead tonight. yet another trial looming, a different one, not the ones we've been talking about, another trial looming ñ president trump, this one over serious allegations datingt( ba to the 1990s. >>> plus, "the new york times" Å$[(ort takes us insaqlq trump world as the former presidentlp braces for i]indictment. that's next.q by temporarily delaying ovulation—and you can resume your regular birth control right away. i've got this. ♪♪ my asthma felt anything but normal. a blood test helped show my asthma is driven by eosinophils, w

with an inmate number from now on. >> jacqui: eric, appreciate your time. >> john: see what the jury has to say and then the caseser that. a live look at the white house where we expect john kirby and karine jean-pierre will be taking questions any minute in the brady briefing room, we'll keep an eye on that for you. >> jacqui: president biden's attorney general merrick garland forced to defend his tenure during a senate judiciary hearing, republicans fired off examples of what they call weaponization of government. >> you have one tier of justice for people that are conservatives, and another for those that are on the left. >> how do you decide which statute you enforce and which you don't. >> the marshals on the scene make the determination. >> marshals do not make a determination whether to prosecute. you, the attorney general make the determination. >> your department is not trusted because it has been politicized. >> john: one line of questioning how garland handled the raid at mar-a-lago. the fbi was hesitant to do that but the doj insisted. bring in nicole parker, a former fbi special agent. great to see y

i know they brought john gotti across the sidewalk and into the building, another high profile case.ssuming president trump would not shy away from the cameras, he generally doesn't, as much as he does not want to see it play out. but trey made great points with you last night and we'll talk to him in the 3 o'clock hour. strikes me the political undertones are so strong it wounds the country in such a big way and if you are going to bring a case against a former president, the first time ever in history, you want it to be unassailable, you want it to be airtight, confidence in the need to do it and i think that all of those things are not where the country is seeing the situation right now. everybody is taking their political bites wherever they can but this is a big deal and i think it's -- we'll see when this is unsealed, if it's stronger than trey seems to think, but really it should have been brought in a situation where everybody would say look, there was -- it was unavoidable, no other choice, and that is not how this feels. >> sandra: peter doocy had a moment this morning, abl

but it may only be a fleeting story because these other cases are coming, i think. >> neil: regardless, johnse, everything has to go through the secret service and all. you know, someone will be indicted on any charge, this would be a first for a former president to put it mildly. coordination is still going to be massive. >> this is the first and unprecedented prosecution of a former president. we've had 230 years of history in this country. even though presidents, ex-presidents are not above the law, we have chosen to leave them alone because we want them to make difficult decisions and not always looking over their shoulder. if you prosecute them in a partisan way like, this all of these problem you just talked about are going arise. you might have political fighting in the streets, supporters against critics. this will continue the fighting of a president's term even when it's over. so how are you going to handle this in a tiny city, tiny area of the massive city of new york city? this tiny area in downtown new york city? how will you handle security if president trump is calling on peop

we are talking to xrp proponent john deeton closely involved with the case alongside charlie gasparino up next. take a look at the big board again markets are selling off, jay powell delivering rough news today. rates probably going to go higher. markets looking for a 50 basis point hike at the next meeting. that is a difference than what we had this morning. "clayman countdown" coming right back. you'll always remember buying your first car. but the things that last a lifetime like happiness, love and confidence... you can't buy those. but you can invest in them. at t. rowe price, our strategic investing approach can help you build the future you imagine. when aspen dental told me that my dentures were ready, i was so excited. i love the confidence. i love that i can blast this beautiful smile and make the world smile with me. i would totally say aspen dental changed my life. aspen dental makes new smiles affordable. right now, get 20% off dentures. we do anything to make you smile. inner voice: (kombucha brewer): when i started my new kombucha business... ... i thought there would be

. >> the campaign finance violation the way thexd case is built, bears similarities to the mq■ john edwardsde an extramaritallp affair amounted toÑi anr contribution.fáq a totalled $1 million.qfálpfá it seems like that -- if that failed in court, if edwards got off forçó that, isn't a tighter case the one bragg is building? >> well, again, we don't know the details. i'ma5■ not sure whether it woule a tighter case and it wasé@■ mo money. ie1 do think, you know,w3 there some úäm■ about building that case and there are some difficulties. certainly it would be much more straightforward ifñrxd there ta implications here. also charged with the falsification of business records to bump it from a q misdemeanor to a felony.Ñi why do people create false business records? >> so i mean it would befá a straightñr forward, more clear case for theçó jury and it wouldn't runÑi into the complications of whether it'snb state law or federale1q law. >> i want to talk about james'! investigation because ÑiÑiit's massive. just talk if you will, the hush money payment thing comes with its peril, thet( potential t

although there were cases of john this be the same by the security forces, they continue to pull little tentative narrative to the government. basically, highlighting well, many survivors was saying the slow response of the state and the ongoing lack of medical support in the following day. now, bye bye coverage, feasible tons of me to pay be fine from the regulatory authorities in the last few weeks. this had a major impact on speaking to one of the editor, the chief one, think me the stations. they say they are constantly walking a tight for they expect find, but they have to be aware that that they go too far. they could face total closure and they openly admit that that is self sensitive. to avoid that, i'm going to say that they all continue with the chinese government and i received over the earthquake. that is going to be key, given the fact that this will be back in the may alex ok. now it has a force now been just about over a month since the, the to us quake struck. can you give us an update on the situation in the affected areas all survive is receiving the support that they

john: love talking to you, mark. you're always one step ahead of me. the other part of the casehome through trickery. she says it in her filing, specifically by trickery, agents of the defendant convinced the plaintiff to pack a suitcase for a short vacation. when she arrived at the airport, she said she was locked out of the resident and in violation of florida law. she's going after a trust associated with tiger woods property on this, not tiger himself. >> yeah, i read that she's seeking $30 million. here's the problem. that's why we have to talk about the other thing that i'm talking about that keeps me a step ahead of you. she can't say much about what really happened because it would be in violation allegedly of this nondisclosure agreement. so she's asking for guidance from the court. i want to go big timeboth in this lawsuit and in the court of public opinion by sharing with everybody details that only i and some of my friend and family know. what can i do? that's what i think is the significance of this lawsuit. that's what it about. >> interesting to note the two of th

>> has to. >> john had an explanation, of course even for that cyanide. >> he says, he has multipl sclerosis and that he kept the capsules around in caseot even to debra. >> he still continued to treat me incredibly well but he tried to isolate me fro everyone >> especially your family? >> especially my family. >> and now, chastened an afraid, she reconciled with he daughters and read everythin they had uncovered about joh meehan's past. i assume by this time, you didn't feel in love with him anymore? >> no. >> what did you feel >> confusion i thought, how could this ma fake it to this degree did he love me or was this all a game i realized i was his newes victim >> and april 2016, 16 months after marrying john meehan, sh fled from the home they shared in las vegas, back to orange county and from a safe distance, sh filed for an annulment and soon discovered it just as tonia bales had discovered years before that john could turn on a dime he started by trying to ruin her reputation sent weird, inappropriat emails to her colleagues and clients. did he send photographs of you to anybody >> he sent nude photos yes. >> that's a nightmare f