i want to bring back our panel, dana bash, rick santorum, kristen powers, bakari sellers, also mark geragos. mark, hush money without the husband, alleged bogus arbitration. who has the stronger case in all of this? stormmy daniels or president trump and michael cohen? >> it's not even a close call. stormy daniels does. first of all, in california generally, as a general rule, the arbitrator does not have the ability to issue what's called injunctive relief. so this idea that somehow they ran into adr, that they got some kind of an order, is lewd cuudi on its face, number one. number two, you can't tell somebody that they can't talk. that's called prior restraint. your only kind of remedy for that is to sue for damages later on. so this is a long way from over, and, you know, notwithstanding all of the ethical issues, the fact that they are claiming to have won an arbitration is almost laughable. >> dana, politically how big a problem is this for the president, or is it? i mean does anyone care? >> there are two questions, right if there's a legal problem, and then there's a political probl

that's different. >> mark geragos, this is a consensual relationship. her attorney said that very clearly. >> very different from the tape. >> yeah, but you know the irony for me, at least having lived through white water, the same voters who apparently don't care about about it when it comes to donald trump, they sure cared a whole lot about it when it was bill clinton. i lived through that in arkansas 20 years ago, almost exactly to the day. and the irony of it is if you're going to be -- if you're going to be so anti-bill clinton because many of the allegations including gennifer flowers were consensual relationships, and yet those people were the ones who were talking about the lack of moral clarity and the lack of a moral compass and blah, blah, blah. and here we are today, they don't care. and i was laughing as bakari, and bewere talking about it, they don't care about the dress. we remember the dress with monica. they don't care about whether he's lying about it, i didn't have sex with that woman. it's deja vu all over again as yogi berra says. >

so with me now, daniel goldman, a former federal prosecutor, and mark geragos is back with us today.ie detector test. first time we're seeing the photo of her all hooked up for this in touch magazine article. lie detectors are not generally admissible in court. any chance an exception would be made in this case? >> no, little to no chance there would be an exception. it's not admissible in either federal or state court in almost all jurisdictions. i think most people accept the fact that she did have an affair with donald trump. i think that's kind of beyond question. maybe i'm nigaive or in a bubbl. but that does not seem to be up for grabs. >> what do you think about this? >> i think the only person who seems to be convinced that it didn't happen, or at least representing it didn't happen is donald trump. but certainly the polygraph is out there, not for the legal case. in fact, most of what stormy daniels and her lawyer have been doing -- is not about the legal case. highly technical case. donald trump himself did intervene in the arbitration last week to say that he wants damages

mark geragos, cnn legal analyst and joan kubiak is with me. joan, first to you, michael avenatti going back to the '90s and paul jo jones case set this precedent. let's get a refresher on what happened there and how it could be applicable today. >> the case had to do with sexual advances that paula jones claimed that president clinton had made. paula jones sues, saying that bill clinton, when he was the arkansas governor, made these advances toward her sheechlt sues for that, emotional stress and defamation. the case is pending and president clinton says no, i have presidential immunity. i can't be called into court at all. the supreme court in 1997 ruled unanimously that, no, you can be forced to testify in a case involving behavior that took place before you were the president if it's not going to take much away from your duties. and in that case, the supreme court again unanimously thought this isn't going to take much out of his duties. can he attend to this, not knowing what was lying, waiting ahead with not just paula jones but monica le

his name, mark geragos. >> i've had many a client who i have no doubt was capable of the acts that he accused of. this is just not one of them. >>> coming up -- in the last hours of jennifer's life, something was caught on camera. does it prove paul is not guilty? >> so you had sex last night with her and videoed it? >> yeah. >> anybody who watches this is never going to have the impression that this was somebody who was ready to kill her. >> when "burning suspicion" continues. >>> hello, and welcome back to "dateline extra." paul zumot's defense was about to portray him and his relationship with jennifer schipsi in a whole new light. here again is keith morrison. >> defense attorney mark geragos has made a name for himself defending clients in difficult and highly celebrated cases, not the least, the scott peterson trial. but defending paul zumot would present its own set of challenges. zumot was accused of killing his girlfriend jennifer schipsi and then trying to hide that fact by burning the house down. but as the trial began, he had also been pegged by the prosecution as an abuse

mark geragos, ariva martin, thank you.eciate it. >>> be sure to watch "ac 360" tonight, more on his one on one with stormy daniels at 8:00 eastern here on cnn. >>> five senior staff departures in three weeks. and now a close friend to the president says one or two major changes could come to the administration. who's next on the president's list? you can't judge sugar looking at the cane, you can't judge a woman looking at her man. you can't judge a daughter by looking at the mother. you can't judge a book by looking at the cover. taking one look. try to read me like a book but i leave 'em all shook 'cuz you can't judge a book by its cover. you can't judge a book by looking at the cover [x2] but their nutritional needs remain instinctual. that's why there's purina one true instinct. real meat #1. a different breed of natural nutrition. purina one true instinct. now, try new purina one true instinct treats. i no wondering, "what if?" uncertainties of hep c. i let go of all those feelings. because i am cured with harvoni. ha

ultimately, at the end of the day. >> mark geragos, scott jennings, josh campbell, never a dull moment around here. thank you. >>> coming up, a democratic member of the armed services committee weighs in on the white house chaos and how it could affect dealings with russia and north korea. >>> plus, the stormy saga and new court filings by the trump team. seeking $20 million from the porn star trying to speak out about an alleged affair. say carl, we have a question about your brokerage fees. fees? what did you have in mind? i don't know. $4.95 per trade? uhhh. and i was wondering if your brokerage offers some sort of guarantee? guarantee? where we can get our fees and commissions back if we're not happy. so can you offer me what schwab is offering? what's with all the questions? ask your broker if they're offering $4.95 online equity trades and a satisfaction guarantee. if you don't like their answer, ask again at schwab. sometimes you need an expert. i got it. and sometimes those experts need experts. on it. [ crash ] and sometimes the expert the expert needed needs insurance experti

district attorney kim waily and mark geragos. finally i want to get your take, what is your immediate reaction to your reading? >> stormy daniels is saying this is about the cover-up, the payment before election day, how that payment was arranged, what it meant for her to be silent in this way, and what she has to do to defend herself. it's one thing to read it, it's another thing to see it. and as we see the clips tonight, as we see this woman testifying to this for the first time on camera, i think this will make a difference. in the same way that karen mcdougal a few days ago made a difference. not just read a headline, see the passion, see the emotion on the person's face, i think that makes a big difference. the one other quote i will put out, at the end of this interview, if the president's watching, i want him to know, he knows i'm telling the truth. >> and credibility is key, right, laura? >> regardless of whether she's credible, if she had the affair or not, it may be a foregone collusion for many people, but for a court

also joining the conversation, cnn legal analyst and criminal defense attorney mark geragos. judge, what does the new judge assigned to the case -- what do i think it means for the case? >> he's a very well respected jurist in the central district, used to be a state court judge. he's been on the federal bench as you've mentioned, appointed by bush, and thoughtful. but generally what happens is you'll do an -- and this is what trump's lawyers are going to do. they're going to do a motion to compel arbitration. generally that's going to get granted. >> why would that generally be granted by a federal judge? >> the central district, the federal district court judges have a much higher caseload than the state court does. generally for arbitration, california state law is a lot more favorable to various kinds of ins and outs or kind of threading the needle to get out of arbitration. that's not the case under the federal arbitration act, certainly not the case in the central district. generally judges are going to lean towards, if you entered into a bargain and you said that arbitr

the issues that sarah huckabee sanders is certainly going to face is this whole lawsuit from, as mark geragosikes to refer to her as, an adult actress. porn star. michael cohen, to you, sir, what kind of law school does one go to, to learn the art to pay a porn star to keep things hush hush? >> reporter: it is amazing what a lawyer might be prepared to do in order to make a client happy. is it worse to lose a client over something? when you have a client who is the most powerful man in the free world you may not want to make him unhappy. >> he went to the same law school where he learned you can't rape your wife. he literally said that. pick aye could pick ten people off the street who say oh, yes, legally you can. >> how she's saying to michael cohen i'm going to have you disbarred for life or your boss, donald trump, knows everything. >> she touches that, right? she doesn't suggest that. if you sign this had deal, did all this stuff and he didn't know anything about it and he's your client, you are not conforming to the rules of your own profession and that could lead to disbarment. she's p

. >> i'll give you a chance to respond to mark geragos. >> i know him personally. he's a good guy and a good lawyer. i couldn't disagree with him more about his assessment, but that's okay. we disagree 90% of the time, and the other 10 we vehemently disagree. it doesn't mean i'm right or wrong or vice versa. >> so what's the next step? >> we're going to wait for the president or mr. cohen to file their motion to compel arbitration, and we'll immediately refile our motion. again, wolf, based on the language of the order that came down today, they are in a world of hurt. they are not in a good place. we told them what the law was before we filed the motion. they didn't seem to understand it. maybe they're going to understand it now, but i think we're going to get the discovery that we've asked for and i think we're going to get the trial we've asked for, and i think the court's order indicates that based on the citation to the law that we initially provided in our papers. >> so you see this federal judge's order as a temporary setback, but it's going take a few extra

." >> defense attorney mark geragos had done what he could to poke holes in the case against paul zumothere was no solid scientific proof that zumot was near jennifer when she was strangled or the house was set on fire. anyway, he asked, if paul attacked jennifer, wouldn't she have put up some kind of fight? why were there no defensive marks or scratches on paul zumot's body? did the prosecution even have a case? paul zumot wasn't going to take any chances. in fact, he was determined to tell the jury his side of the story. so geragos assigned a female colleague to question paul. a strategy, whispered courtroom observers. a way to show the jury paul could impracticnteract well wit woman. but those people were mistaken, said geragos. >> i don't think direct examination is my strong suit. i was concentrating on cross examination of the witnesses. >> so paul zumot looked the jurors in the eye and told them, i did not kill jennifer schipsi, did not burn the house. then he told them emotions burning to a fever pitch how despite their roller coaster relationship, he truly loved jennifer. his l

. >> so with that now out there, we should bring in our own legal advice, mark geragos as well as laurarst of all this filing by michael cohen, what does it mean? why the president's team would want to move the case? >> there is usually two reasons. one you either don't like the cait state court judge, which it could be in this case. or you want to get it out of the state court and into federal court, which is a common move by usually corporations or large-scale defendants. they feel like they get better justice for them in federal court. the irony here is that trump obviously is the person who appoints federal judges and he does not have any sway over state court judges. the interesting twist to this is the state court judge could do very little to enforce anything against the executive branch. so it may be a case of be careful what you wish for because now the federal judge, which is called an article three judge will have the authority to order things against donald trump as an executive in the executive branch whereas the state court judge would have had a lot more trouble enforcing

want to bring in now cnn legal analyst mark geragos and a rib a martin. the author of make it rain.tin, you have to get a book so i can promote it here on tv. >> mine has been out for five years. let's promote ariba's. >> thank you, mark and don. >> so, it's been a busy 24 hours. mark, this is for you. especially in this stormy daniels saga, we are now learning she is suing president trump's personal attorney michael cohen for defamation. does she have a case? >> yes, she probably does have a case. i don't think that it's going to get thrown out on a demur, but it may get compelled into the same arbitration. remember, judges, when they get these cases and understandably they're over worked, so the simplest thing is when you've got an arbitration agreement and anything that arises out of the arbitration agreement, especially here where the other party has already compelled you or tried to compel you to arbitration, i think that's where it ends up. i mean, it's great for prolonging the story, but ultimately it's going to end up in arbitration. >> and i just spoke to stormy daniels's f

joining us now, mark geragos. as well as corinne jean pierre. of these e-mails he's showing which show the communications from the bank went to his corporate e-mail address and michael cohen for some reason forwarded that e-mail to his private e-mail in order to communicate with stormy daniels' attorney. >> i think one of the reasons that you see the s.a.r. report coming out is it's taken off of an equity line. then transferring it to a newly formed llc. i'm sure the bank when they saw that triggered somebody who ran something saw it was newly formed and that's why there was an s.a.r. what i make of this so far is i think it's clear that given the judges who were involved, judge connor, who is involved, who is the retired judge who issued this, i can't believe that she knew all of the stuff that we now know or at least is alleged. >> this is the arbitration judge. >> that's the arbitration judge. she works at adr in los angeles and is a very well respected judge both when she was on the bench, and i've used her for arbitrations -- for mediations