karen henderson and judge cannon. thank you so much for your time and thoughts this evening. >>> coming up, nikki haley turns up the attacks on trump and biden and barack obama. more on that coming up. >>> but first new subpoenas to fani willis may require her to testify publicly about an alleged a affair. whatge does that all mean for t conspiracy case against donald trump? that's next. pie against donald trump? that's next. >>> there is some news out of fulton county, georgia, today where district attorney fani willis who has charged donald trump and 18 others in that sprawling election conspiracy case, where she has been subpoenaed. d.a. willis may now have to testify publicly in a hearing next month over allegations she was an affair with prosecutor nathan wade and mr. wade benefitted financially from their relationship. the subpoenas were part of a new lawsuit filed by mike roman, an alleged fake elector and trump codefendant who's trying to disqualify d.a. willis from this case. mr. rollin' is now claiming d.a.

karen henderson, and george w. appointee, and aileen cannon a trump appointee.friends, it's been great having you. here thank you time and thoughts this evening. coming up, nikki haley turns up the attacks on trump and biden and barack obama. more on that, coming up. but first, new subpoenas to fani willis may require her to testify publicly about alleged affair. what does that all mean for her case against donald trump? that's next. trump? that's next. discover a different first treatment. immunotherapies work with your immune system to attack cancer. but opdivo plus yervoy is the first combination of 2 immunotherapies for adults newly diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer that has spread, tests positive for pd-l1, and does not have an abnormal egfr or alk gene. opdivo plus yervoy is not chemotherapy, it works differently. it helps your immune system fight cancer in 2 different ways. opdivo and yervoy can cause your immune system to harm healthy parts of your body during and after treatment. these problems can be severe and lead to death. see your doctor ri

they wanted to get karen henderson, that bush-appointed judge, who is known to be prickly.he asked harder questions at the oral argument to join with judge pan and judge childs. they got that. and the power of the opinion, the depth of the opinion, it's a landmark in what has been a long history of important opinions from the d.c. circuit. >> do we know they were trying to persuade? is that the reason or the thought? >> that's the assumption. given the speed they scheduled oral argument and the clarity of the views of two of the judges, you have to ask yourself, why did it take four full weeks. pan and childs were in a hurry. must be that they were bringing henderson along and that was the right decision. >> you look at this. it was unanimous. and the court shot down the idea of absolute immunity. the court shot down double- double-jeopardy. they shot down the notions and this is an important part, of whether he was acting in his official capacity, so to speak. they are not convinced that the actions he had taken fell under the scope of a president. is that right? >> that w

still very fast for, by any normal standard, but they wanted unanimity, laura, they wanted to get karen hendersonappointed judge who is known to be prickly. she asked harder questions at the oral arguments to join with judge can and judge child's. they got that and the rezoning power of the opinion, the depth of the opinion is a landmark in what has been a long history of an important opinion from the d.c. circuit. >> do we know that they were trying to persuade? is that the reason why there was a delay? or is that the thought? >> that is the assumption. because we, given the speed in which they scheduled the oral argument, and the clarity of the views of the two of the judges, you have to ask yourself why did it take for full weeks? pan and charles were in a hurry. it was in bringing henderson along, and that was the right decision. >> you look at this joe, and you think about, it was unanimous and the court shut down this idea that there was absolute immunity. the court shut down the idea of double jeopardy attaching because there had been a political impeachment. they shot down these notions,

karen henderson, a george h. w. appointee and aileen cannon, a trump appointee for whatever that is worth. my friends, thank you so much for your time and thoughts this evening. coming up, nikki haley turns up the attacks on trump, and biden, and barack obama. more on that coming up, but first, new subpoenas to fani willis. they require her to testify publicly about an alleged affair. what does that all mean for the conspiracy case against donald trump? that is next. i scheduled with safelite autoglass. their experts replaced my windshield and recalibrated my car's advanced safety system. ♪ acoustic rock music ♪ >> woman: safelite is the one i trust. they focus on safety so i can focus on this view. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ i still love to surf, snowboard, and, of course, skate. so, i take qunol magnesium to support my muscle and bone health. qunol's extra strength, high absorption magnesium helps me get the full benefits of magnesium. qunol, the brand i trust. things have gotten better rec

judge karen henderson, judge -- , and judge michelle childs. there was no legal reason for him to be in the room. donald trump is of course profoundly stupid, but still not stupid enough to think that his eyes or his hair or his makeup or his red necktie would intimidate those judges. and surely, the dark, twisted coils of donald trump's brain were still able to process the obvious fact that these three women had complete control over him, in this proceeding. they ended their unanimous opinion on page 57 today, with a fully researched and authoritative pronouncement that unsurprisingly reflects everything we heard them say, in the courtroom that day, looking down at donald trump. quote, we have balanced former president trump's asserted interests in executive immunity against the vital public interest that favor allowing this prosecution to proceed. we conclude that concerns over public policy, especially as illuminated by our history and the structure of our government, compel the rejection of this claim of immunity in this case. we also have

of a president's duties, and beyond that there is no immunity, and at the oral argument, judge karen hendersoncircuit and the most senior judge seemed to be flirting with the idea that we should import that rule from the civil context and make the criminal one just the same. that could be a disaster here. >> hold on, let's walk through this and get very specific. that means that donald trump would be immune for anything related to his official acts as president, as the civil statute says, and i guess the question, then, would be, does what he did on january 6th and leading up to january 6th saying the election was stolen, even though courts kept telling him there wasn't, there was no evidence, his team never produced evidence of fraud, and he was just saying it, does that fall within the bounds of his official duties? >> well, let's even go back a step further because on a motion like this, the court has to take all of the allegations in the indictment as true, meaning they don't get to parse out did donald trump actually do the things in the indictment, assuming all of the things that the spe

we have michelle childs and florence pan appointed by president biden, but karen henderson was appointed during the bush administration and so, they aren't representative of a -- what trump could point to as a partisan panel or something. >> can i say something about michelle childs too? michelle childs was a district court judge in the district of south carolina and her nomination to the d.c. circuit was backed by someone that we usually associate with former president trump, that is senator lindsey graham was the single largest backer of michelle childs' nomination to the d.c. circuit. while she is a biden nominee, she is one with somewhat of an unusual panoply of supporters in getting there. you certainly can't accuse her of being a flagrant democrat without republican support when you have lindsey graham sitting next to very proudly at your nomination hearing before the senate judiciary committee. >> laura, i want to ask you a question in a second. we have neil katja also with us, who has a narrow window in which he can join us. former u.s. solicitor general. as you're going through

that was from the lone republican-nominated judge on the three-judge panel, judge karen henderson.issued by that panel, which delivered a massive blow to the with twice impeached four-times indicted former president. the judges found that trump is not immune from prosecution for acts committed while in office, a defense he has used or he's attempted to use to dismiss the federal election interference case against him brought by the special counsel, jack smith. the appeals court judges argue that trump, like every other american is bound by the law. to say that trump or any president is above the law strikes at the heart of the american experiment, they say. they write, quote, at bottom former president trump's stance would collapse our system of separated powers by placing the president beyond the reach of all three branches. presidential immunity against federal indictment would mean that as to the president, the congress could not legislate, the executive could not prosecute and the judiciary could not review. we cannot accept that the office of the presidency places its former o

different political and judicial philosophies that are coming together, one of the judges is judge karen hendersonme confidence there that this trial, the federal election interference trial, the january 6th trial for short would take place before the election. tell us why you think that because certainly as legal experts have said there are ways this could slow down. the supreme court could agree to hear it but maybe not until october and there are other machinations that this could still slip and slip and slip. why do you think it won't? >> it's going to take five justices on the supreme court to say that and in order for five -- of course, anything can happen and, you know, trump has the point that the supreme court has never squarely said that presidents have or don't have absolute immunity from the criminal law. he's right about that. the supreme court has never squarely said it one way or the other. the reason they have never said it one way or the other is because it's a crazy claim as donald trump's own lawyer basically admitted to the court of appeals saying that under their trump view th

contributor lulu garcia-navarro, bloomberg political and policy columnist nia-malika henderson, cnn political commentator karen finney, and republican strategist shermichael singleton i am dying to hear what each of you has to say about this because what we're seeing tonight, yet another race and yes, trump was successful. but to abby's point, i mean, he could have been more definitive in his win. lula me ask you about this because he was expected to win. nikki haley is saying, look, i already told you super tuesday is where i'm going. she's vowing to stay in the race she is going to stay in the race. i have long said, i'm not exactly clear who is her constituency in the republican party. i mean, this is the thing, this is a republican primary and we've seen her be very strong with independence. we've seen her be very strong with people who identify within the republican party as moderates or liberals no exactly who they are, but apparently they are people who supported nikki haley. >> and >> yet and yet here we are. and you see that polling and you see that she has no path going forward. and so all the specul