or mark pomeranz's book?e facts already, it does make it somewhat unique and different from other criminal cases. whether you have donated, those are questions that don't bear on whether or not you have a clear bias. you can remain a republican. it is a possibility. he is allowing for that in his questionnaire. >> there is evidence, they left their maga hats in their car and returned a verdict that was not beneficial to donald trump. >> one of the jurors in the e. jean carroll case listened to more right wing media consumption. and, that was unanimous jury verdict in her favor. so it is possible. >> it is possible. and we will find out what happens in just a few days. thank you for joining me onset tonight. >>> coming up, what is jared kushner have to do with burger king? a lot. as it turns out. that's next. as it turns out. that's next. shop etsy until may 12th for up to 30% off special mother's day gifts that go beyond the usual suspects. save on personalized jewelry, original decor - and other things moms

have you read mark pomeranz's book. given how much is out there about these facts already it does make it somewhat unique and different from all these other criminal cases, but i think the judge was right to say who you voted for, what particular party you're affiliated with, whether you donated, those are questions you could be a clear republican and still listen to the evidence, put aside any views of who you think the president should be, and be fair and impartial. that is a possibility, and he's allowing for that in his questionnaire. >> indeed, there's evidence of people who are die hard trump supporters or left their maga hats in their car to return a verdict that did not benefit donald trump. so we know the past could be present. >> and we saw that in the e. jean carroll case. one of the jurors had identified as somebody who identified as having more right-wing media consumption, and that was unanimous jury verdict in e. jean carroll's favor. so it is possible. >> it is possible, and we're going to find out what

dispute breaking out over potential witness in the case, trump's attorneys issues a subpoena to mark pomeranzt attorney's office and then quit and wrote a book about his work investigating donald trump. while the investigation was still going on, the singet most irresponsible thing i've ever heard of a prosecutor or special prosecutor ever doing. but the trump lawyers are interested in a possibly obtaining his testimony. the d.a. has filed an opposition to that and certainly saying we would at minimum have to clear anything that he might say that could violate the codes of the way the d.a.'s office operates. we've never seen a subpoena or motion like this before. this is a pretty strange thing to have to wrestle with? >> yes it is. and as you say, he is totally talking out of school. the important point, lawrence, i think is the context could this give trump a card to play to delay the trial? the answer is no. the very most that would happen is maybe the judge says okay you can have a couple pages, the subpoena is actually for documents and the d.a. has argued forcefully there are none and po

there was another exchange with a potential female juror who talked about reading mark pomeranz book, you know he was an attorney working in the manhattan d.a.'s office investigating the former president, and subsequently left after alvin bragg became the manhattan d.a. i'm worried to know too much. i'm worried it's going to seep in some way. there are no wrong answers, sign steinglass says, can you put that aside? and the juror says yes. this is a couple of examples of what's going on in the courtroom. in a minute or so it's going to change over, todd blanche, the former president's attorneys in which they're going to get their shot at these potential jurors and it moves on to the period where they decide who will get struck from this jury. if they have causal reason to strike them or they want to strike them. they only have four chances either side to do that left. >> so yasmin, stay with us. also keep an eye on that google doc with the latest reporting so we can be on top of it all. charles, today we are moving backwards. we started the day with seven people who had been seated in

witnesses in this case, including michael cohen, stormy daniels and even former new york prosecutor mark pomeranz, who apparently trump wants to see jailed. the posts including amplifying comments from michael avenatti who you might remember represented stormy daniels before she fired him for apparently stealing from her and other clients. something for which he remains in prison, though he somehow is also still doing interviews. and also for amplifying this segment on fox, attacking the jurors in this case on april 17th. >> they are trying to rig this jury. they are catching undercover liberal activists lying to the judge. >> yeah, no, they're not. judge merchan proceeded to scold todd blanche for not being able to explain to him how trump's posts were responses to political attacks. it's like watching the kid who didn't do his homework get owned by the college professor. when it was over, todd blanche was moved to second chair. it was on to business, part two of the questioning of david pecker. pecker, who owned american media inc. in the early '90s was a smooth talking silver haired man who se

there was a memo from mark pomeranz. he spoke about it to file a criminal case. he didn't.asier political thing for him to do. he didn't do it. and now we're seeing he's kind of maybe this like super meticulous guy. he clearly has done a lot of work and thought in terms of determining whether he was going to move forward on this. it's interesting because he was projected as this person who was slow, who wasn't going to act. he has acted. this is the only criminal case we're seeing now in a trial in trump in the courtroom. but overall, ari, andrew kind of made this point earlier. is that at the end of the day, donald trump was in a courthouse today. this has been the wheels of justice have moved very, very slowly. years slowly. but he was in a courthouse today. he's been trying to obfuscate, delay. >> to your point, this day was not certain. georgia is a big case. jack smith has a strong case. the fact the table had trump sitting there and now being told by the judge you will keep sitting there. this is the first time that's happened in any jurisdiction. so let you run to pr

it is the cover-up and it is, as mark pomeranz talks about, it kenton while donald trump was presidentthe united states. >> and someone is trying to rig an election in his favorite the heart of this. and for all of the kinds of manhattanites and new yorkers that will sit on this jury, they'll have to figure out. did this guy really do it. and you know, new yorkers might be 70% democratic, but we also care deeply about elections. >> and cheaters. >> and cheaters and fairness. and care about accountability. and one of the things that i just want to -- the politics is interesting because one thing that i keyed in on "the new york times" story is the kind of juror that donald trump might be looking for. that blue-collar worker, sanitation worker or the firefighter, but there is also the thread that he might be interested in a young african american man. and why is that? because he could find -- he thinks he could find sympathy among those men in that he could say, look at how unfairly i'm being treated by the system as were you. and this, to me, is this continuation of an extraordinarily d

so alvin bragg said, i'm not going to charge that criminally, then mark pomeranz went public. i said that was an outrage. alvin bragg should have charged the inflation case criminally. alvin bragg took a lot of backlash for that. at some point thereafter, alvin bragg returned this indictment a difference, something else. a different okay. it's okay. and the original one, letitia james, the attorney general of new york, did bring a case exactly that became the civil case, which we just heard. >> trump ranting about. but i just want to add something that you were saying when we were listening to donald trump, what you just said is all 100% accurate when it comes to the confines of the case in that courtroom. that's not who we know. >> he was talking to. voters expected voters, the american people, the american electorate, and there was a lot of stuff in there that might've been borderline, true. there was there was a lot that just was just not true. not true. there's no evidence that president biden is involved in this nun. i mean, that's just one of many things. and his entire