judge jeanine: breaking tonight. president trump hours away from landing in singapore for his historic summit with north korea's kim jong-un. welcome to justice. i'm jeanine pirro. thank you for making "justice" number one again last week. the summit that could change the course of history is just days away. tonight we are talking about it with white house deputy press secretary hogan gidley, darrell is a and mike huck we. huck -- mike huckabee. as our president is getting close to doing something in north korea that no other president has been able to do. there are many in theainstream media who are rooting for him to fail. hate is their daily fare. they hate him so much, they want him to fail. peace be damned. if he doesn't get credit for being one of the smartest, most of clever and successful negotiator presidents of all time, then we'll know for sure what it's about and who they are. they are not just haters, and this is about more than just politics. they are rooting for america's failure, and that is you be am

justice with judge jeanine is next. remember i'm watters and this is my world. [♪] judge jeanine: welcome to "justice." i'm jeanine pirro. thanks for being with us tonight. and thank you for making justice number one last weekend. kellyanne conway, congressman ron desantis and tomi lahren are among my guests. but first a very important opening statement. i'm a believer. i believe in the system and i believe in justice. i dedicated more than 30 years to the criminal justice system and the assignment of blame. tonight i'm not angry. i'm just dumb found and disheartened and disappointed. over the long awaited, often delayed inspector general's report on the actions of the department of justice and the fbi in the handling of the hillary clinton email investigation. the report's conclusion, 568 pages later, fbi director james comey was insubordinate. there were a few mistakes anderrors in judgment. though there was some bias, there was no evidence of bias in the email investigation. this report mimics comey's conclusions in

judge jeanine: do you take selfies? >> no. judge jeanine: do you know what a selfie is? >> yes. judge jeanine: it's on video. watch it. kim kardashian says she is not taking selfies anymore. >> oh, please, never. i would never believe that. i can't imagine her staying out of the limelight. judge jeanine: what makes a good selfie? >> going higher than yourself. judge jeanine: like this? >> it projects amazing light. judge jeanine: why wouldn't you want to look better than you look in person, then when people meet you they are disappointed. >> you hide in your room and make everyone think you are beautiful. judge jeanine: should you smile? >> a lot of girls go for the duck face. judge jeanine: how many selfies does it take to get the perfect selfie? >> at least 100. judge jeanine: do you know how many selfies it takes to get a perfect selfie? who has that kind of time? have you ever taken selfies? >> yes, but i don't share them. judge jeanine: you make them for yourself? >> that's a selfie. that's a good one because we smiled. judge jeanine: we'll be right ♪ a hotel can make or br

when the judge has resigned. but it doesn't necessarily end the inquiry. for example, we've had a resignation in the throes of an investigation. by the way, your judge newman is on our conduct and disability committee now. a very active and good member of that. but we've had a situation even when a judge has left the bench, we've nonetheless made a referral to the house and ultimately the senate that they consider impeachment. even after the judge has left the bench. while our review process ends with the resignation, retirement of a judge, it doesn't end it entirely necessarily. there could still be impeachment. >> thering still be impeachment, but that itself is a pretty cumbersome and challenging process. >> it is. >> so i would suggest respectfully -- in fact, i would urge that jurisdiction be retained and i think naturally should apply to the compensation judges continue to receive. my understanding is that judges kosinski and smith still draw an annual salary from the federal government, correct? >> it is t

circuit court now includes a trump judge. that's very important. 21u.s. circuit court judges. everywhere you look there is trump progress. regulatory reductions. consumer confidence. it's all around us. those who deny it are spitting into the wind. but who cares. we don't pay attention. he's there for the forgotten man. not the cranks on tv who don't want to give him any credit. judge jeanine: nancy pelosi when she heard that the meet was off with kim jong-un, she was almost cheering and saying it was a big win for kim jong-un. now that it's back on for june 12, all the naysayers said it will never be back on. americans have to say to themselves. this guy really does know what he's doing. he's bringing kim jong-un to the table. yes? >> literally. everybody should be happy about it. a denuclearized korean peninsula is in everybody's interest. i don't know why the democrats would cheater lowering of the fortunes or the rising of the probability the meeting wouldn't happen. the president sent that letter just 8 days boulevard north korea was here in washington, d.c. trying to get

to the judge's office. she could not sleep at all, and by the -- and by the time she left the clerkship, there was nights that she would lie in bed and watch the feeling into she had to get up and go back to work. on the last day of her clerkship, she informed her that the beauty of judicial confidentiality is that it went to two ways. she recalled that judge 25 explained that quote, that as long as i never ever told anyone what it happened in the chambers with him, he would never tell anyone what it happened with me. judge 25 -- judge kozinski , wasn't interested in controlling his law clerks for their tenure, but wanted to have control over them long after they completed their internship. he use threats to silence the former female law clerks. she is one of the two women to first come out on the record about harassment, and she has been remarkably courageous throughout this entire process. becoming ford first along with emily murphy, she has made it easier for other clerks in the future to feel more comfo

judge jeanine. ♪ >> judge jeanine: welcome to the special edition of "hannity": trump's big week.'m jeanine pirro intimate version on. without a doubt, this has been a momentousee past few days for president trump, his agenda, and the nation. the president kicked off the week inn singapore for a historc and successful peace summit with north korean dictator kim jong un. this is something that many analysts and pendants thought was totally impossible. but now, we have hope that the total, verifiable denuclearization of the korean peninsula as possible. next, we learned that successfully negotiated the u.s. to go host for 2026 world cup. remember, obama pushed hard to host the world cup but ultimately failed it would the bed. this week, we also got some very good news on the economic front. the federal reserve bank of atlanta just increased its second quarter gdp growth forecast to 4.8%. that is more than double the average quarterly growth underro president obama. and yesterday, the all-important ig report was released, and its findings indicated president trump's decision to fire

one district court judge's decision. other judges are not out by that. we don't see a whole lot of implications or drawbacks for future termers. ajit pai what is the government theory he reject it do you think is valid? >> in a vertical merger, it is interesting because we think about horizontal mergers which eliminate head-to-head rivals. it pairs up and put the distributions. in this case it is. not content with distribution, video distribution. vertical mergers, even though they put together complementary set of the level they call horizontal effects in market. in this case, the government's concern was because of at&t's market power combined with time warner, the company would have enhanced incentives after the merger to make it difficult for rival distributors, whether cable distributors for direct broadcast satellite distributors to get time warner content and i would make it more difficult to compete and potentially raise prices to consumers. it would hamper or hamstring competition. the judge reject the god on the basis of the government theory o

there was no argument by the judge that was the market but at the same time, the judge sort of pivoted off of that, and it was clear through the entire opinion that he was embracing a much broader definition of the market. to have you o.v.d.'s, online video distributors like netflix, amazon prime, but also creeping into the zone of looking at mobile applications, and digital advertising markets, such as tech platforms, google and facebook. while he accepted a more narrow definition, which actually makes the effect of the merger more pronounced, he was indicating that he was thinking about change in the industry in a much broader definition of the market. the bigger the market, the more inconsequential a merger becomes. right? joshua: i think it's really important to note -- much of that i agree with, including diana's description of the market definition discussion, nd the context of this larger debate, and antitrust in this country over how frequent vertical merger challenges should be. we haven't had a fully litigated vertical merger challenge in some time. in terms of the benefits o

no argument by the judge that was the market. at the same time, the judge stted pivoted off so tt it is very clear that he was really embracing a much broader definition of the market to include online video distributors like netflix, amazon prime, but also in the zone of looking at mobile applications and digital advertising markets such as the tech platforms. molly accepted this more narrow definition from which makes the effect of the merger more pronounced, he was indicating a much broader definition of the market. the more inconsequential the merger becomes. >> it's really important to note much of that i agree with including the market definition in the context of this larger te andntitrust in this y asould be. an some time in terms of the benefit, this debate is not taking place in front of judge edof can be that hundr millions of dollars of consumer benefits arriving from the merger. the law professor in the width up to 30,000 landscape decisions assigned to my students. the real decision before him litigated between the

other judges are not bound by it. we do not see a whole lot of implications, drawbacks for future merger enforcement. >> what is the government's theory he rejected you think is valid? >> in a vertical merger, with think a lot about horizontal mergers, which eliminate head-to-head rivals. a vertical merger tears up up inputs with distribution. vertical mergers, even though they put together complementary assets, can still have what we call horizontal effects. in this case, the government's concern was that because of at&t's market power combined with time warner, the company would have an enhanced incentive to make it difficult for rival distributors, whether they be cable distributors or direct broadcast satellite distributors, to get time warner content. that would make it more difficult for them to compete and potentially raise prices to consumers. it would hamper or hamstring competition. the judge rejected that on the basis of the government's theory of harm, that the company would have more bargaining leverage w

judges decision, other judges are not bound by that. we do not see a lot of implications. >> what is the government. that he rejected that you think is valid? a vertical merger, we think a lot about horizontal mergers that eliminate head-to-head rivals. vertical mergers pairs of impulse with distribution. in this case, parent of content with distribution. merger, even of they put together complementary assets, can still have what we call horizontal effects and markets. in this case, the government's at&t's was a because of market power, combined with time warner, the company would have enhanced incentives to make it difficult for rival distributors, whether they be cable distributors are direct broadcast is two meters, to get time warner content. that would make it more difficult for them to compete. that would potentially, raise prices to consumers. it was rejected on the basis of the governments. of harm. they would have more governing and basening leverage his findings on rejecting person andence from participants rejecting economic

we want quality judges.esidential race that was so different was he put forward his list. he said, look, this is part of the package. this is what you get. i've been asking candidates to do these sorts of things for years. i'm glad to finally see it actually happen because it provides accountability. and frankly, if he sticks to his list, he can go into the u.s. senate and say, look, this was part of the u.s. presidential election. and the last time we had a mid-term appointment to the supreme court was justice kagen in 2010, and she went through in 72 days. so there is very recent precedent for doing this at this time. but what there isn't precedent for is a president who's already put his list before the american people, and that means everybody who would look closely at them, too, and vet themselves from left and right. >> but that's hard to do, ken. >> it is hard to coo. >> when you get the list of people, even somebody who's trained in law, it's hard to get a sense of who anybody is by looking at their

the judge. there might be cases later and challenges in the future where the government puts forward different evidence. one implication is the doj or whoever is contemplating the merger will read the opinion and say that if we plan a arguing the same style of leverage or we plan to embed a bargaining model within our economic argument is going to be very careful of the inputs we put into the model. much of the judge's opinion reject the inputs and suggest sloppiness in its application. >> when serving as a federal trade commission or as a republican commissioner, you both indicated and i want to little more discussion that this decision is not necessarily sweeping or precedent-setting in either way. >> i have some mixed feelings about that conclusion. narrow in the sense that it is a very fact specific as most merger cases are, analysis of if this particular merger violates the clayton act. so, narrow in one sense. there has been much discussion in the popular press along the lines of, does thi

my understanding is that the judges ski and judge smith still draw an annual salary.i'm not sure what it is -- >> yes, they do smack to know offhand contract. >> it's the base salary which they would have received. >> yes. >> if they continue to serve as judges so they had no work but they have the pay. >> it is true and that applies to any judge tires. i don't know of any employment arrangement in which an individual pension is eliminated for misconduct. i'm not excusing any behavior whatsoever but to put it in perspective that is not unusual in the workforce because pensions are protected. i will say this in regard to judges we have what is called the rule of a.d., 65 years old and 15 years of service before you can draw anything so we have had the judge that we preferred for impeachment did not reach the rule of 80 when he resigned from the bench. he walked away with zero, nothing, no pension even though he had been a judge for over a dozen years, probably. he walked away with zero. some of the city regarding salaries in the aftermath of resignations i would put ad

-- judges no court cases no opportunity to claim asylum or have their cases heard before a judge? >> just like i said, just because you don't see a judge doesn't mean you aren't receiving due process. the president would like to see us stop people from illegally entering the country at all. we would like to have secure borders. the democrats want open borders. the president would like us to secure the borders and have a very legal and easy immigration process so people can come here the right way, not the wrong way. john? >> in addition to what john was asking, under current law, you spoke to this, contiguous countries to the united states, like mexico and canada, people can be removed on an expedited basis. they can basically just be taken to the nearest border crossing and sent back. does the president want to implement that type of policy where people from noncontiguous countries, is that what he is looking for here? >> he would certainly like to see more expedited removal, but ultimately he would like to see our border secured so we don't have all of these problems to begin wi

the way it's working, the district judge richard leon, a very experienced district judge, old school guy for what it is worth, has just come in with the decision, and hillary has it now. do you? what are we hearing? reporter: connell, we got the word, judge richard leon ruling in favor of the at&t-time warner merger. his reason was the d.o.j. did not follow through on the burden of proof. there is a wild card here. a lot of people following this trial over several weeks said don't put it past the d.o.j. to walk away from this. they have the option to appeal this decision. but for now, as it stands, could this have a ripple effect on several other deals waiting in the wings of those. one of those decisions involving our own parent company twenty-first century fox's pending deal with disney who wants to buy twenty-first century fox's entertainment content. comcast has gone on the record saying theylan to make a competing bid for the fox content but also this could bleed into another deal, t-mobile could use this to boost their case to say they should be allowed to take over sprint and

own judge but other judges? i would characterize it as information gathering and and noting employees only judges but other employees -- >> what i would urge you to do and requested that you put in place a system for annually surveying support staff about these issues. my final question is, it has come to my attention that many judges, including a judge kaczynski, require locker to sign company jodey agreements. i have a bill that is with senator murkowski called the empower act to address the culture of silence that surrounds these concerns in these issues. addressingar, we are the confidence you out a agreement. determine survey to how he judges -- have you done a survey to determine how many judges are requiring confidentiality agreements? or verbally indicating that there is a confidentiality agreement that must be -- >> maybe a little more than that. we have imposed very strict guidelines and a clear in our confidentiality provisions in our code could to thwart aized reporting of misconduct or any sort of a

it is the judges.s talk is tantalizing and drives news very often, but only one word he has said defines him to this point, and that word is gorsuch. that's why mcconnell and ryan in large part stay silent in the face of comments and policies they probably don't agree with. that's yechb jellicals and conservatives are so forgiving of a president who doesn't exactly exemplify the character constraints they've applied to others. and as we've learned tonight, while the supreme court can have the final say in some let's say 80 cases a year the federal appeals courts are usually the final stop nearly 1,000 times as often. 1,000. these decisions affect real people. one example, what just happened with the president's travel ban. the supreme court handed the president a big win ruling he does have broad powers under immigration law in the name of national security. but the travel ban the supreme court upheld was not the ban that led to chaos and protests in the streets in the first days of his presidency. why

, judge. >> judge: sounds like the white house wants to resolve this now. they don't want it lingering and affecting the elections in four and a half months. have the democrats captured the day by the manner in which they have addressed this issue? >> you know, i think they are, indeed, gaining ground there is a perception that what chuck schumer said about this isn't for congress to fix. it's for the white house to fix maybe did not portrayed him in the most favorable light because this really have a matter for congress. but, you know, judge, if i could throw it back at you if you are judge dolly gee of the district court in california, and you have this president approach you and modify and allow these parents to stay with chir parents longer, what do you say. >> judge: i would modify it if i were the president i would disobey that decree in the interest of compassion unless somebody challenged me, which it sounds like that's what he is going to do in a couple minutes. >> clearly he will get challenged on this as well. i have a number of sources in the ad

other judges are not bound by that. we do not see a lot of implications drawbacks for future merger enforcement. that: what is the theory you think he rejected? diana: we think about horizontal mergers with head-to-head mergers. it pairs of inputs with distribution. pairing of content with his generation. mergers, even though they put together, mentoring assets, they can still have horizontal effects in markets. the government's concern was that because of at&t's market with time warner, they would have enhanced incentives to make it difficult for rival distributors, whether they be cable distributors or direct broadcast distributors to get time warner content. that would make it more difficult for them to compete and caused them to raise prices. it would hamper the competition. the company would have more bargaining leverage with their rightful distributors after the merger. basing his findings on her projecting her stand evidence from participants in the market. rejecting the economic models. wright, what do you think

what more could we ask for from a judge? throughout his public service, justice kennedy has mentioned the generation of jurists who went on to become -- he's mentored, not mentioned, he's mentored a generation of jurists who went on to become luminaries in their own right. not least among them is justice neil gorsuch, a former kennedy clerk. and now serves as his equal on the supreme court. with his one time pupil now working alongside him, with dozens of former clerks now serving in the federal bench, justice kennedy leaves behind a legal legacy that is almost without equal. although he will be stepping down next month. his influence on our judicial system will be felt for generations to come. with justice kennedy's impending retirement, the responsibility now falls on us to confirm an able replacement. in the coming weeks, the president will announce his nominee to fill justice kennedy's seat. in doing so, he will seek the advice and consent of the senate. a process that entails confirmation hearings and extended hours of

yes, many judges will tell you judging is judging, but it's a different kind of judging on each level. and i'm so grateful that i had the opportunity as a supreme court justice to know what the other two experiences are like and to understand both the power of each position and its limitations. and i think that that makes me, i hope it makes me more respectful of what the judges below me are experiencing and why they see things differently than we do. some of my opinions have reflected that and reflected my understanding of what the judges were looking at and the whys of why they were asking. so it's been a marvelous experience for me. i often have said in the past that i wish i had been a judge before i was a litigator. >> [laughter] host: hard to do that. [laughter] justice sotomayor: i thought how much better if i really understood what judges were looking at. and i'm grateful now that i had those experiences as a justice. host: that's how i feel about being a bob professor. i wish i could go back to law school. i would kill law school. justice sotomayor: i think you would do ok. [

in this case, this is the judge in the eastern district of virginia, judge ellis, this judge is a little bit of an unusual cat. and i know there's an appropriate way to say that while maintaining appropriate deference and respect for the bench here. i'm not -- i do not mean to cast aspersions. i'm not saying there's anything wrong with him. i just mean that reading transcripts of him in court is a little weird. there are surprising moments. and that has to affect how the prosecution and defense approaches things in his courtroom. it has to. because it's -- it strikes me as weird. let me give you an example. so this is a moment in the transcript. this is a prosecutor from the special counsel's office, prosecutor named uzo asonye, and he's questioning this live witness. first time we've had a live witness on the stand in the special counsel's investigation. right? he's questioning this live witness who is an fbi agent. the agent who obtained a search warrant in the paul manafort case. and so this from the transcript. mr. asonye, the prosecutor says, question, "did mr. trusko tell you if mr

but the judge rejected that. i think judge leon was very concerned if he allowed them to kind of pursuit that line of extend thisey would case will into the future. you have to realize that the lawsuit the doj filed to block this deal was in november him and the trial started four months later. it is an incredible short timeframe. trump is already on record saying he does not like this deal. he thinks -- he said he thinks there's too much media concentration. but there is this counter argument, is he trying to get some kind of revenge or richer vision against at&t because of cnn? host: our first call is from new york, independent color. first time caller. i'm no expert on this merger, but i guess the question i had were, is, this is a vertical merger and by definition, that to be anseem to me antitrust issue as much as the merger between disney and 20 century fox, which is a horizontal merger. merger, at&t-time warner , in my mind, does not seem to be eliminating a lot of jobs whereas the disney-20 century fox me

as we sit here today, judge, mr. manafort has committed a crime while he's on bail. as we sit here today, judge, mr. manafort is out on a $10 million recognizance bond and he's been indicted for a crime while on bail." and the judge responds, "thank you. i want to take some time to absorb it." and then at that point there's actually a little bit more arguing, more pleading from manafort's defense counsel about the delicate balancing act the judge says is needed here. the judge says okay, takes a 15-minute recess. and then she comes back and she issues her ruling. and she explains why she's going to put the president's campaign chairman in jail. and this part of what happened today, this is the part that -- it's going to make your kid who's watching with you -- watching this tonight with you, it's going to make your kid want to grow up to not be just a lawyer and to definitely not want to be a defendant. this is the part that's maybe going to make your kid want to be a judge. so if you don't want that, time to turn me

judge cavanof. he has expressed in writing that the nighttiindictment of the int would cripple the government. >> that's interesting from judge kavanaugh. it may be a fun thing to chew over with him on the law review. it is another thing entirely that he's considered for the supreme court by the president who's campaign manager is on trial. they're all awaiting sentencing and cooperating with prosecutors in this ongoing fbi counter intelligence investigation. no president picked the supreme court nominee of looking down this potential liability himself. >> senator cory booker says supreme court nomination under these circumstances should not happy just as a single matter of a legal conflict of interests. senator booker will be here in just a moment to make a case on that point. in terms of how long this is a live issue and how long this is going to go on. the president told reporters that he'll start to meet candidates this weekend. he's going meet with supreme court nominees, potential nominees. he

so this is -- the president is complaining about judges and saying that we shouldn't have all these judges, and people who come over should just be put out, but nothing is actually going to change? he is just saying -- he's just complaining about the process as it stands now? sec. sanders: things that we have the ability to do administratively we are working to do. but again, congress is the only one that has the ability to write law, and we hope they'll do that this week. steve. >> honing in on that point, i'm trying to understand what it is the president understands about the current policy. because as you've explained, expedited removal allows the government to remove hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants a year without seeing judges. did the president know that when he issued the tweets? sec. sanders: yeah, but there are still thousands that go through a very lengthy process. we'd like to see the process consolidated. we'd like to see the backlog stopped. we'd like to see our border secured. >> just a follow-up -- you've said that he would like to see more expedited removal. does

would the judge saying he deny a stay.t want to mention that. >> ordeal is a nice way of putting it. we have followed this from the beginning. howalked endlessly about badly this is gone. what does it mean for other deals? if you are interested in doing a big deal already in the public domain, the department of justice -- it's hard to see how they go after another company with the steal. had they won, i think people would be very spooked. you would have a president in place which would worry people about trying these vertical mergers. when at&t and time warner proposed this deal 18 months ago, there was no precedent. there was nothing in this space that wicate that they would lose, that they would either -- even be a case against them. ,aving seen them go through having seen the justice department lose in this particular trial, if you are putting together did of companies that do not have direct competition, you would feel pretty good about it right now. julia: i'm seeing other comments crossing the wire, comments from the

yes, many judges will tell you judging is judging, but it is a different kind of judging on each level. i'm so grateful i have the opportunity as supreme court justice to know what the other two experiences are like, and to understand both the power of each position and its limitations. i think that makes me, i hope it makes me more respectable of what -- respectful of what the judges below me are experiencing in why they might see things differently than what they do. i think some of my opinions have reflected my understanding of what the judges were looking at and the whys of why they were asking. it has been a marvelous experience for me. i often have said in the past that i wish i had been a judge before i was a litigator. [laughter] >> hard to do that. justice sotomayor: i know. [laughter] justice sotomayor: but i often thought of all the mistakes i made as a lawyer and how much better i would have been if i understood, really understood what judges were looking at. now that i hadul those experiences as a justice. >> that is how i feel about being a law professor. i wish i could g

this judge is after specificity. >> that's right. the criminal proceedings i have observed in south texas, occurred independently of this order because they were separate proceedings. this was not immigration court i sat in on, this was federal criminal court and only misdemeanor cases before a magistrate. and that magistrate told the 70 to 75 defendants that i saw, i have nothing to do with whether or not you were separated from your children. fwh nothing at all. and in a way he was right. in a way it's not true also because the u.s. attorneys in there, are not u.s. attorneys they're custom and border protection attorneys who are cross designated as u.s. attorneys. so they can certainly address the issue of children. the point is the court's order today as to the immediate reunification with children and their families will exist independently of those misdemeanor prosecutions. as long as the trump -- the current administration chooses to prosecute those en masse you're going to have this, because parents can be separated from their

yes, many judges will tell you judging is judging. but it's a different kind of judging on each level. and i'm so grateful that it had the opportunity at this a supreme court justice to know what the other experiences are like, and to understand both the power of each position and its limitations. and i think that makes me, i hope it makes me more respectful of what the judges below me are experiencing and why they may see things different than we do. and i think some of my opinions have reflected that have reflected my understanding of what the judges were looking at and why, why do acting. so it's been a marvelous experience for me. i often have said in the past that i wish i had been a judge before i was a litigator. [laughing] >> hard to do that. >> i know. [laughing] but i've often thought of all the mistakes i made as a lawyer and how much better within if i understood come really understood what judges were looking at. and i'm grateful now that i had those experiences as a justice. >> that's how i feel about being a law profess

judge should deny this merger, the judge went even further than that.aid to the government, and very stern words, think before you go to the appeals process with this. think before you move for a stay here. he said that at&t had already suffered harm in this given that the government has been working to block this merger since the lawsuit in november and since the trial started in march. i just want to -- a bit of the language that the judge gave here, again it was quite stern . he said i hope the senior leadership of government will s get a stay and how manifestly unfair it would be when deciding whether to seek the stay and so the judge warning the government after the government has lost this case, which the government argued for six weeks here at this federal courthouse saying to them, think twice here before you move forward with any motion to stay whether you move forward with any plans to appeal. because again, jake, this merger deadline is just days away on june 21st. if the deal doesn't go forward by then, either party could walk away from this