Concession at all. Was Michael Dreeben essentially admitting the attorney for the special counsels office, essentially admitting that these facts were so strikingly intertwined in a colloquy with Justice Barrett that it would be very difficult to separate them out on remand. Thats how i interpreted his statements, at least. Well, and to translate that for people watching, that means that basically, if it wasnt official act, they would not be able to use that potentially at trial. He was arguing they should be able to use it to paint a bigger picture. But trump has argued, total immunity. He has not said, well, some of these are private x. This would mean the case could at least in part go forward and go to trial. We believe that without the official acts charged in the indictment, there is no case. Weve been very consistent in our position from the start, starting with the District Court proceeding through the circuit. Now at the the us Supreme Court, that what were talking about is absolute immunity. Yes. But absolute immunity just for a president s official acts in office. I think thats a crucial distinction thats been missed in much of the Press Coverage around President Trumps die, there are no case if its just for part of the acts that are in the indictment. Well, because the indictment itself relies largely on acts we believe are clearly official. Were talking about lets break down what will looking at things like asking the Department Of Justice to investigate claims of election fraud, considering replacing the Acting Attorney General of the United States, which is at the absolute heart of the president s power under article two of the Us Constitution we believe that this is an indictment the charges, official acts, and therefore, if the if the court were to recognize the sort of immunity that weve proposed, we dont see how this case could proceed, but as john said today, you also believed that this indictment charges private x. John said that he could be tried for private x. There are some private acts in the indictment. Are there . Their act itd be characterized as private in the indictment president wouldnt have immunity from those. The question though is why cant those be tried . And the ones that you say are official trying to make jeff clark, the Attorney General, put those aside and remove them why would trump not be able to be tried for the private well, i think if if you read the indictment, what theyre trying to point to as a much larger scheme that really involves largely official conduct so without the official conduct of the Supreme Court word are recognized president ial immunity, the way that weve suggested, i believe the indictment would have to be dismissed. What are the private acts that you believe are in the indictment . Id have to look at the indictment more closely, but i think the sorts of things that youre talking about, price havent conversation that were mentioned that the court today, private conversations between the president and his political team, that sort of thing looks more like private conduct then the sorts of things we just discussed, like directives given to the Department Of Justice and consideration of president ial personnel. But the other acts that were brought up today, were what conversations he had with people like john eastman and jenna ellis and Rudy Giuliani, three people who did not work on behalf of the federal government. Those are charged in the indictment. So why could trump not go to trial for that . But its worth noting and its really important to explain what this, these alternate slates of electors were really throughout american history, probably most notably in 18, 76, when youre challenging a president ial election after the certification deadline in certain states you present alternate slates of electors and that gives political actors the opportunity to get to the bottom of whether fraud occurred, whether outcome determinative fraud occurred. And it allows as them to pick a different slate in 18, 76 rutherford b. Hayes was elected president on the back of three alternate slates of electors. Those sorts of preparatory actions giving political actors the ability to act on allegations of election fraud. I think theres the intermixed private, and official conduct their and that ultimately will be a very thorny issue for the District Court on remal to assess. Its a pretty generous view of the fake slates of electors. As Amy Coney Barrett justice noted today, even this is fake paperwork that was just created for slates of electors that were not alternate. They just were fake. They were from audio a little again in 18, 76 rutherford b. Hayes was elected president 20 in night, theres a long history of this in 1960, theres not a long history of multiple slates of fake electors, people who are not the legitimate electors representing the will of the voters in arizona, wisconsin pennsylvania, and michigan. Well, again, what were talking about is alternate slates of electors and you can kind characterize them as fake or not. But in cases where there are serious allegations of election fraud, this is the system thats been used throughout american history, probably most recently in the 1960 election when an alternate slate of electors from hawaii was season. Let me ask you this because if you believe that there are some private acts in here and some official acts in here. What . Can you ask the District Court two months ago to suss that out . Why wait and take it to the Supreme Court with this claim of total immunity or position has been consistent from the District Court through until today, we believe that President Trump has absolute immunity for his official acts in office. The di doesnt draw that he absolutely does. The dc district unfortunate newly issued a ruling that said there is absolutely no immunity in the criminal context, The Dc Circuit affirmed that incorrect ruling and the reason why the argument today, i think took the tender that it didnt probably the reason why were before the Supreme Court at all is because of the egregious snus of those decisions to not record ignites any immunity in the criminal context whatsoever. Well, the Supreme Court, the justices did see if the conservative ones, at least skeptical of that. But i have to ask you Something Else because when one of the justices asked today if the president ordered a Military Coup, if that would be considered an official act your team, john sauer argued, quote, it would depend on the circumstances, whether it was an official act. What what are the circumstances were ordering a Military Coup is an official act of the presidency will get when youre talking about official acts, you dont look too intense. You dont look to purpose, you look to their underlying character. So if that were if that sort of situation for to unfold using the official powers of the president , you could see there being an aspect of official nes to that. I would say though, that our constitutional system provides powerful structural checks against exactly those sorts of scenarios which have safeguarded our republic throughout american history. So the idea that thats the argument people make. And also we never were at a moment where a sitting president tried to overturn a legitimate election until now, again, i would, i would fight. Youre characterization of what happened in 2020 but all of this parade of hypotheticals that some of the justices today that our opponents have put forward, whether its the quds, whether its Seal Team Six assassinating political rivals. Its worth noting that the structural checks in place in our constitution not including criminal prosecution of former president s have served to safeguard us from exactly those sorts of scenarios throughout american history. And its actually our Parade Of Horribles. This idea of political prosecutions, crippling president s, thats what were seeing play out out in america today. Well, i would disagree with that characterization. I know that that you refer to them as the Biden Investigations obviously present bidens not involved in these, but you just said that theyre hypotheticals you know, theyre actually not alyssa farah griffin, who is a Comms Director in the white house, tweeted this and said that there was a moment where she personally witnessed donald trump suggesting that whoever leaked that, he went to the bunker during the George Floyd Protests at the white house should be executed. So its actually not really that but they obviously werent executed. But the person has to be executed for it to be brought to bear. I think hyperbole has a place in almost any office, but id come back to it gets just hyperbole. I get pretty brazen argument that Military Coups could potentially be official acts that will the person wasnt executed, so it doesnt matter just because of Military Coup or any of these sort of Parade Of Horribles could constitute an official act, doesnt mean that theyre right, doesnt mean that they would be allowed under a Constant To Tunnel System and doesnt mean that were in any way, shape, or form justifying that what were talking about here though is the scope of immunity that president s need to be able to rely on to discharge their core article two responsibilities as president without immunity. I think youll end up in a situation where president s will essentially be blackmailed by their political rob bowls with the threat of political prosecution the day they leave office. And to me thats a very scary scenario. Or do you disagree with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson who said, what youre arguing could allow the seat of the presidency to become where you can act with impunity that any criminal act couldnt happen because you have nothing to fear, no prospect. We believe immunity is inherent in the constitutional design. So thats the system weve been operating under for hundreds of years and its not actually in the constitution. We believe that immunity naturally follows from the constitution the same way that civil immunity, which isnt written in the constitution naturally follows from our constitutional system. And that was recognized by the court and nixon v. Fitzgerald in 1982. What victory . Here is it . The Supreme Court embracing your argument on total immunity, or is it just sending it back to the lower court and therefore, delaying the january 6 trial from happening before the 2024 election. We think its very important for the future of the presidency, for the court to embrace a vigorous doctrine of president ial immunity in the criminal context. So thats what victory oh considered a victory if they just send it back to the lower court and then it essentially delays the trial. We believe that whats going on here is much more important than this particular trial or this particular defendant. We believe that whats at stake here as the future of the presidency and without a vigorous immunity doctrine, i fear for the future of our country. Well, sharaf great to have you, you are inside this frame court today. Thank you for joining us. Thanks for having me also here tonight. My panels back with me. Donald trumps former attorney, jim trusty, cnn legal analyst and former federal prosecutor, elliot williams, and civil rights lawyer share lin eiffel, who is the Vernon Jordan chair and civil rights at the Howard University law school. Let me just start with you since youre just joining us, can i just get your reaction to what you heard . From trumps attorney of how they viewed today yeah. I mean, it was an interesting argument in that there were these hypotheticals that should have been at the most extreme, but they really werent because the person that were dealing with, donald trump is the same person who asked his defense secretary, couldnt we just shoot shoot protesters in the legs . He is the same president who said he wishes that he had generals like hitler had generals in germany. We just heard the tweet that you mentioned about someone being executed for leaking that he was in the bunker during the George Floyd Protests. The examples that we were hearing today from some of the justices about what a president who felt he had unfettered power and would suffer no consequences could do were ripped from the headlines they were the kinds of things that the former president has said. And i think it was shocking to hear the former president s attorney, mr. Sour suggests that those things could be official x selling Nuclear Secrets to a foreign adversary. We have a president who stole classified documents, which is the subject of another piece of litigation. So these are not things that were pulled from the sky. These are real serious possibilities and to have the attorney of the former president s stand in the well of the United States Supreme Court and suggests that these things could be official acts. And the only thing more shocking than him making that argument was having a majority of Supreme Court justices not sound as though they were horrified and aghast at hearing that that was the position the former president was taking. Jim trusty. What was your reaction . Because john sauer didnt make a Big Concession Today and saying that some of that in the indictment is private x ive never heard them say that before. Hes conceding the flavoring of the private acts provided by coney barrett. Questions which he says shimming the criminal intent within the actions which gets you down to very minute factual issues of like did it did did an elector, a replacement. I liked her feel like they were defrauding or were they actually thinking this is the backup plan if we went in court which has a lot of things that have been said by that other side. Look, the reality and what were kind of struggling with. I think collectively is the court is likely to try to create a line, but that line is going to be a difficult fine to define precisely so when you talk about an official act, is it this particular minute action or comment or conversation, or is it within the broader category of defending the country or safeguarding elections . And were not going to really know where they come out on that until they do, but thats going to thats going to be the battleground, going ford for litigating whether something falls within or without immunity. Yeah, and both john sauer and well moment ago, both exceptionally good attorneys. All i think all but conceded that the next step ought to be number one, either sending it back for more findings or just let it go to trial and have a jury sort out this question of whats an official act and what isnt but it was a huge concession for which neither of them i think had very compelling answer to be perfectly candid. I thank its not just mere hypotheticals. We are talking about specific conduct that a president can engage in. Whats make up another one right here. If a president kidnapped or kidnapped and and harm Supreme Court justices for the purpose of a pointing, their successors, clearly an official act of the presidency. Also clearly a crime. And you cannot keep a straight face and make an argument that thats not a prosecutor will act thing that stood out to me also was i remember when trump was impeached after january 6, and Mitch Connell stood in the well, the senate said, well, the Justice System will take care of him. This is not the place to take care of this. The Justice System. The argument that kinda went over like a lead balloon today, the john sauer did still tried to make was that you must president first must be impeached and then convicted two, then be prosecuted for some yeah, this is the baitandswitch, even trumps attorneys said that after trump was impeached, Mitch Mcconnell said it and his attorneys also said that the proper avenue is criminal prosecution, not this process. So thats kind of a baitandswitch, but i want to get back to Something Else. I dont think that these private acts that were conceded today, which i think frankly, i want to be nice to mr. Sour, but i dont think that he did a terrific job. Those concessions were deadly calling the speaker of the house of the Arizona Legislature and asking him to call back the legislature so that they could put in fake electors doesnt have anything to do with the president s official power, doesnt have to do with the justice department, has to do with the president placing a call to rusty bowers and arizona to ask him to do something that was illegal. The president telling Rudy Giuliani to spread the idea of this false elector scheme to various people is private attorney that is not an official act. A call to raffensperger this to raffensperger, the secretary of state and saying, find me 11,000 four votes. This theres nothing about this that is entangled with the official powers of the presidency. And any one of those counts of the indictment are deadly for this president i think thats why sour didnt come back after for rebuttal because i think having made the concessions he made and having had the court frankly, not not react in the way that one might have expected. I think he thought it was better that he not come back up to the podium and further unravel his case. The problem is not whether sour, sour, terrific job or whether these private acts and official acts are comingled. Its the proclivity of a majority of this Supreme Court to give the benefit of the doubt to a former president whos demonstrated that he is not deserving of the benefit of the doubt that the Prime Directive should be protecting our country, our democracy, not this president. And he, the end, was saying, we do want a full victory here. We want them to fully embrace our argument, but do you believe it would be a victory and the Trump Legal Team size if this just does go back down to the lower courts which would for people at home being like, what what does that entail for the case . It would basically have so many complications and delays that theres no way would happen come before november. I mean, look, the whole notion that there speedy trial need to try the j6 case by date, certain was absurd. This was jack smith with a very Receptive Court trying to push for something that makes no sense. Speedy trial, right. Is entirely or 99 designed to protect a defendant, particularly incarcerated defendant, from sitting and rotting in prison. And then eventually being acquitted. So this idea that they had to have done was pretty shamelessly political. And i think thats why the Supreme Court bristled when jack smith said less expedited, i dont think they care about i have this whole conversation months ago. Well, they dont care about the political timeline that jack created. And so on. And so what im saying is the realistic ending of this case, if the majority holds with how oral argument went is that theyre gonna be returning all of these cases where immunity is in play to factfinding lower courts, which will then have litigation like he had with Police Shootings about whether its in the course of employment. And then theyre probably going to march right back up to the Supreme Court and say, how about this is not the last appeal to go all the way up without question. Well, if its after the election and the election goes, mr. Trumps way they will never see the light of day because we know hell get rid of the investigations up next. Well return to the former president s criminal trial. New exhibits just came out and were also getting new insight, gleaning it from the full tree transcript that we also just received moments ago. Everything that happened in that courtroom today also, a Law Professor and his doubts about the prosecutions case when youre the leaders disaster clean up and restoration, how do you make like it never even happened, happened serve ever even happened. Okay, yeah, we got horners coming starting a business is never easy. The star name, eight months pregnant, thats a different story i couldnt slow down. We were starting a business from the ground up. People were showing up, lift they were right. And so did our Business Needs the chase car made it easy. When you go for Something Big like this, your kids need it and they believe they can do the same. Earn limit 1. 5 cash back on every purchase. But the chase ink business unlimited good card from Chase For Business, make more of whats yours well humpty dumpty, does it with a great fall wonderful pistachios get cracking oh, yeah. Ticket from your inner child. What you really need to live is some torque was dodge corner good that totally torqued out crossover smile. You found it the feeling of bindings, psoriasis cant filter out the real you so go ahead, live unfiltered with The One And Only so tick to a oncedaily pill for moderate to severe prac psoriasis and the chance that clear or almost clear skin, its like the feeling of finding youre so ready for your closeup, are finding you dont have to hide your skin. Just your background. Once daily. So tick two was proven better, getting more people clearer skin than the leading pill dont take if youre allergic to so take too serious reactions can occur. So ticked, you can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb, serious infections, cancers, including lymphoma, muscle problems, and changes in certain labs have occurred. Tell your doctor if you have an infection, liver or kidney problems, high triglycerides or had a vaccine or plan to tick two is a tick to inhibitor tick two as part of the jackpot only, its not known as a tiktok has the same risks as Jak Inhibitors fine. What Plaque Psoriasis has been hiding . Theres only one, so tick two. So ask for it by name. So clearly you so tick to you, its really your way choose three flavors for just 20, like newest street corn shrimp, fin are famous garlic shrimp scampi, its time to grab some cheddar bays and good flavor full hurrian to try shrimp your way only at red lobster, how do i get my raised beds looking so good . I do have a secret, a very special secret. Its organic soil from miracle grow, your great to ryan, not as g my name is oluseyi and some of my favorite moments throughout my life are watching sports with my dad. Now, i work at comcast as part of the team that created our ai highlights technology, which uses ai to detect the major plays in a sports game. Giving millions of fans, like my dad and me, new ways of catching up on their favorite sport. With custom gear, get started today at customer. Com, the white house Correspondents Dinner Live Saturday at seven eastern on cnn were now in todays testimony cross examination. The former president s hush money trial, specifically the strength or not of the prosecutions case that in the wisdom of bringing it, joining the panel, someone with doubts about both boston University Law professor chagrin author of the peoples courts, pursuing Judicial Independence in america professor, thanks for being with us i read this oped you wrote in the new york times, it was titled, i thought the bragg Case Against Trump was illegal embarrassment. Now, i think its a historic mistake. Why a historic mistake . One big Picture Problem with as a historic mistake is that those of us who have been dreading the return of donald trump to office and misusing power. Weve been talking about the rule of law for years and what the rule of law means is there are rules and some of those rules include precedence because those you have to follow those rules. If you expect The Other Side to follow those rules. So weve been concerned about the misuse of prosecutorial power donald trump is telling us exactly what hes gonna do with Civil Service and the doj now is the time to make sure prosecutors are not abusing their power and to make sure that we following the rule of anything prosecutors are abusing their power . Yes. I think this case is an abuse of y. Theyre some of the followup that ive done on this case is to dig into how it is unprecedented. So there are three ways this case is either unprecedented or its based on untested novel theories are applications. The first is that there has never been a state prosecution. Ive searched for all the state cases that referred to the federal Election Campaign act, which is the core of the case. That is the underlying crime thats at the basis of the manhattan das this is the da is trying trump for a federal violation shoehorn into state statutes, a State Prosecutors never tried this before, right . Because the federal Election Campaign act, but either by law or norm or lack of State Expertise is for federal. So thats one problem. The second problem is also a kind of jurisdictional problem. Trumps lawyers argued that this particular statute using a State Violation state Business Recording mr. According to upgrade it for the concealing of another crime, it has to be within new york jurisdiction are a lot of good reasons why that might be the manhattan das response. They couldnt cite a single precedent of a judge validating that use means that thats an untested use. And the third problem is that there has never been an application of intent to defraud, which is a key element of this case its never been used this broadly. Its never been used as an intent to defraud the General Public, never used as Election Interference, whatever that means legally. So if its unprecedented it means that it is being used for trump and trump only accept it could be used by The Other Side. Now, thats the problem, but ced isnt the issue that the conduct is unprecedented. I mean, isnt the fact that filing false Business Records is routinely prosecuted in the new York State Court courts whats unusual here is the false Business Records were used to cover up a Campaign Violation that doesnt happen very often. Ive never heard of it done before. Isnt that the issue . Not the fact that this was some novel use by the prosecutors. It was novel crime. So one problem is you could always go to a level of generality with any case of selective prosecution can say, well, this is the first time a, an Orange Colored president has ever done this. And then youve got that unique circumstance to differentiate it. There are Campaign Finance violations. Campaign finance filings that are missed filed. In fact, the Clinton Campaign Hillary Clintons campaign had some issues with that. Obamas campaign. Now im not saying its the same, but this happens all the time and yet, no State Prosecutors over tried it. Thats an each one is a separate problem. So its it is a remarkable coincidence that this manhattan da, has stretched each of these three things for the first time when you also campaign to become that nat da on the platform of Holding Trump accountable, america, american prosecutors in states, they run for office. Thats true for every, so theres nothing unusual about bragg no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Jeffrey, you know better than i do. For me because ill get that guy. They do not say that no one runs for office and says, you vote me in it. Im going to get that guy thats not what happened its not whats supposed to happen. And all the bonds away is i did not know that thats not what he said running. My code for cell, i share some the professors reservations that are stated in the article ive said a lot of this, honore do think theyre Out On A Limb somewhat in terms of the charging theory, its a new theory also, as jeffrey correctly says, its unprecedented conduct. I do want to ask you about something you write though. You say that this case is an embarrassment of prosecutorial ethics. Now theres a difference between i questioned the judgment in bringing this case. Maybe he should maybe you shouldnt maybe the case is weak or strong. But when you, you, criticize someone for prosecutorial ethics, what specific prosecutorial ethics violation do you think there is here . Well, there is an aspect of this about ethics, which is that the part of two to comply with six, the right to be informed of the nature of the indictment thats part of the sixth amendment something unique happened in this case, which was and for the entire year the indictment of 34 charges were only specified. The business filings, and there was silence about what the other charges it was shocking to me someone who cares about Mass Incarceration and prosecutors misusing their power. This was an example of what prosecutors do all the time, and its im glad that theres a Spotlight Being shown on it and i am curious how many times, just to complete the thought, the manhattan da trumps lawyers asked for a bill of particulars. This is the way that new york says and claims to comply with the sixth amendment in this case, the manhattan di a refused to provide a bill of particulars and the judge allowed it. Now, i wonder if that how much that happens and maeve is a spotlight on process, but just gonna do, what do you think . Yeah. So i think that i want to wait and see how the evidence comes in to really evaluate the strength of this case and the merits of bringing it. I agree with you that its a novel prosecution, but it is nival conduct and its a capacious statute in new york. This could conspiracy to promote an election through unlawful means that appears to be the primary theory of the underlying crime that the da says, the falsification of Business Records was intended to conceal an aid so that statute that hes relying on is a very fraud statute under new york law. And it seems to me it can be read plausibly to cover violations even of federal election law. And so it is true that it needs to go up through the Appellate Courts whether this is a valid legal theory, but im not as disturbed as you are by the attempt to use it if the facts barrett out so the problem with one persons capacious is what the legal system also called ambiguous. Now that use of that statute is 17152 the unlawful conduct is not its own crime. So the concept that you can prosecute someone for unlawful conduct thats just that that is not the primary conduct. The way the clique case is being tried is that is the state law to shoe horn in the federal election filing violation. The case is about the only way to understand the intent to defraud and the whatever this unlawful conduct is, is that its a federal Campaign Finance filing which the Biden Administration deserves more credit for bending over backwards, not to charge it. So the idea that this is a trump has claimed and alleged that this is biden Election Campaign interference to the it actually belies that claim that the biden ministration didnt charge it, but the fact that the Biden Administration that the biden deal jay didnt charge it is also part of why we have a central federal government to do this so that we dont have red state republican prosecutors indicting anyone who says anyone who has a filing violation because then that is a descent into the lack of rule of law except that the statute in new york that is the basis are one of the bases for the theory here is a conspiracy charge. It doesnt require proof that the federal election violation was actually committed necessarily. And so it is in that sense, broader arguably than the charge that could have been brought in federal court. So there are differences between the theories that the state apparently is able to pursue as a federal government may have been able to process. I just want to say to your point, ive never heard as when i was a prosecutor as Defense Attorney in state court. Ive never heard of her refusal of a bill of particulars for people want to know a bill, particularly like tell the defendant when hes charged with, tell the defendant what youre accusing him of and its the most simple, most basic sixth amendment right. You dont, judge . Ive was sort of a judge you dont have to turn over bill a particular id judge, i dont even know how am i supposed to defend them if i dont know what im defending him against, it makes no sense, judge. Triggering. I appreciate being with us thanks. Im not sure i understood it all, but i feel smarter of revenue. Listen to this conversation. I appreciate it coming up new cnn polls on what the former president s legal troubles may mean for him politically switch to shopify and sell smarter at every stage of your business. Take full control of your brand with your own custom store scale faster with tools that let you manage every sale from every channel and sell more with the best converting checkout on the planet a lot more take your business to the next stage. When you switch to shopify when did i call the filter . When i saw my gutters overflowing on my porch, we feel for a permanent gutter solution. So youd never have to worry about costly damage from clog gutters again, its easiest call you can make colleague three, three lethal ter today, morphism lee filter. Com sometimes the lows of bipolar depression feel darkest before dawn. With cap lighter, theres a chance to let in the light kept lighter is proven to deliver significant relief across bipolar depression unlike some medicines that only treat bipolar, one kept lighter traits. Both bipolar one and to depression and in Clinical Trials Movement Disorders and weight gain, were not common. Call your doctor about sudden mood changes. Behaviors are suicidal thoughts antidepressants may increase these risks and young adults, elderly Dementia Patients have increased risk of death or stroke. Report fever, confusion, stiff, or uncontrollable Muscle Movements which may be lifethreatening or permanent. These arent all the serious side effects calculator can help you let in the light ask your doctor about kept lighter, find savings and support acat blighted. Com critics are calling challengers nothing short of miraculous sexy, had deliriously enjoyable. How often does this happen . Going after the same girl not miss this movie, Challengers Go Army Beat us tonight hen we say itll be on time, they expect it to be on time. Turned shipping to your advantage, keep those expectations with reliable Ground Shipping thanks, brandon with usps Ground Advantage with priceline vip family, you can unlock deals five times faster. You dont even have to be an actual family. Id be the dad on the day physically, its clear that im the dad. Okay. So which data is pain . Youre theres things that work better together, like your Workplace Benefits and retirement savings. Jolla helps you choose the right amounts without over or under investment. So you can feel investment. So you can feel confident can your the future is here. Weve been creating it for more than 100 years, from the most advanced technology to the broadest, most Reliable Network of sales and service dealers. Always moving forward. We lead. Others follow. Imprint for certain. Ive had to go montgomery and tokyo and this is cnn new poll numbers. And tonight shedding light on what the many legal problems that weve been talking about could mean for donald trump politically play a huge outstanding question that nobody really knows the answer to at this point. But this new cnn poll out tonight finds that 24 of voters who are currently Backing Trump say that a conviction in any of his cases, mike calls them to reconsider their support most of his backers now of course, say that they would stick with him, but 24 could be enough to make a difference in a close election. Im doing tonight to the table by republican strategist doug hi back with us. Elliot williams also here seen in commentator ashley allison, who worked on President Bidens 2020 campaign, and former federal prosecutor. Can we also here with us . Doug i mean, this poll shows this isnt an academic question that were having. It could potentially have a real impact on the electorate. It could, and we saw this on tuesday night and pennsylvania, where over 150,000 republican primary voters voted for nikki haley, whos no longer republican candidate. So they werent making some choice based on who the republican nominee would be. They made a very conscious decision. They dont want it to be donald trump and i was at nikki haleys one of her last two or three rallies in raleigh, north carolina, and the atmosphere in that room was real i knew that most of those people were probably going to vote for donald trump. But if you were putting on a tshirt that said permanently banned, that the Haley Campaign and created im just going to be harder for you to make that decision. This is what were seeing and if youre convicted, trump is convicted. That makes it harder. The other problem is, as this case goes on, it makes it harder for donald trump to make his case hes to those voters who dont like donald trump and dont like joe biden to talk about inflation, to talk about crime, to talk about the border, because all of this drowns out those things that republican candidates worth on the top of the ticket or down below the ticket, want to be talking about . Yeah. We started seeing real outreach from the Trump Campaign to those nikki haleys your orders. Let me this is a question with the Biden Campaign looking at these numbers, 24 would reconsider their support. I mean, obviously at this point, they can write somebody in, but the other person that they would logically maybe vote for President Biden well, i want to know who those 20 for our especially right now because i wonder where they were in the primary. Are they part of that 150,000 that doug just reference that might have voted for someone else in the primary are looking for a home, looking for some someone to do some outreach to or are they just annoyed and frustrated with this narrative . Of around donald trump being chaotic and causing all this drama. And they dont want that as the party that who those 24 are, are really important if those folks voted for donald trump in that 24 and 2020. And they write someone in im not saying you throw away votes, but i think the and in campaign might look at it as a net neutral. But if they were people who voted for joe biden in 2020 are saying we arent satisfied with his performance and were looking at donald trump you want as the Biden Campaign to find those people and get them back into your column. If there are people who just really are not politically engaged and if they decided id wake up in the morning, you also want to try and move them. And so its really i dont think theyre all the same either. And so you really need to figure out who they are and how you move them and what issue matters to them. And if it really isnt, just dont want trump, then talk to them and feel it figured out how to get them in your canvas shell. The term looking for a home that you said is very important because after the primary republicans and democrats, you sort of, sort of the same language, youre voters going to come home. Most of those voters are going to come home for donald trump. So were not really talking about 150,000 republicans in pennsylvania. But if were talking about five or 7,000 and pennsylvania or arizona, or north carolina, things get really interesting, especially if we Start Talking you about also third or fourth party candidates. So its been fascinating as weve seen, even people who have been heavily critical of donald trump, people like bill barr, that former Attorney General say theyre still going to support him in november. She and the other number in this poll, 44 of americans are confident than trump can get a fair trial in the hushmoney case that were watching play out right now. I mean, trump im self has been weighing in on the jury claiming its 95 democrats, which we cant verify because you dont ask their party registration. But what do you make of how the public is viewing whats playing out in the courtroom. I think the public views the courtroom as a trial court room. I think they have a stronger sense that theres fairness involved. I think they have a sense that theres a judge and control. Theres gonna be a jury of the peers. I mean, 44 versus 50 versus a majority. But i think unlike the General Public sentiment, youre seeing with the Supreme Court i think theres still a core group of american outlook that thinks, okay, when it gets in front of a jury, thats probably going to be more of a fair outcome. Well, i mean speaking, trumps been coming out and now trying to make Campaign Style comments as you walked into the courtroom, we talked about the gdp gas prices. Israel protest, or their oil in College Universities right now but today hes theres a question of whether he violated his gag order. The dej scheduled a hearing initially for next wednesday when i noticed trump had two events wanted walker shaw and one in michigan and freeland michigan. Now the judge has moved that to thursday. Were not totally clear on the reasoning for that, but it does show the Campaign Trail versus courtroom argument. Absolutely. And look, as weve learned, quite spectacularly, the courts system operates on a vastly different timeline than the political system as well see what the Supreme Court and the federal Election Interference case that will likely not happened before the election pardon me, your question the way weve been doing it that good of a question well, i was just saying trump is in making this argument that he cant go out on the Campaign Trail because he isnt the courtroom four days theyre not in the courtroom. Next wednesday. They werent supposed to be. And so they scheduled to Campaign Events that day. And then initially, it looked like his Gag Order Hearing was going to maybe throw a ring around im sorry, i forgot. Know that this is all on the judge quite frankly, for taking as long as he has on the gag order. And for a couple of points. One, in the context of the former president s civil trial, he actually started behaving better after having been fined and having the fines be raised, and he paid them and then stop acting up and quite frankly, if this judge were to just simply have the hearing on this imposed, whatever fines or fees hes going to also admonished the president in front of the jury. What we want to be in front of a jury, but in front of the public that could go a long way to maintaining some semblance of order in the courtroom, but right now, this is an important issue that is unresolved and is giving the president a longer leash yeah. To to keep making statements which what about this . What were seeing, these numbers . Theres 44 are confident he can get a fair trial here. I mean, it just goes back to the importance of what we saw at the Supreme Court today. If it means that the january 6 case, the effort to overturn the election doesnt happen before november. So much of what we see in politics now is what people want to see happen, or what people think is going to happen is what they want to see happen. And that poisons or politics regardless of how you look at it. But this isnt just about whether or not donald trump can go on the Campaign Trail if hes in a courtroom all day, hes not going to be able to do the things that any candidate does in any campaign for any office, have meetings you cant sit down with his Campaign Staff and talk about strategies on different states or communications or fundraising, donor maintenance, as you know, very well, he cant do any of those things. Hes a weekend warrior in that sense, sometimes a late night warrior. And thats it. Well, wait to see what those implications look like just ahead, new details from the trial itself. What were Learning Running about what was said today, its a fascinating backandforth in the transcript everybody wants super straight, super white teeth. They want that Hollywood White smile, news censored in clinical white provides two sheets, whether teeth and 24 7 sensitive your production. I think its a great product. Its going to help a lot of patients weight coming, waivers biggest sale of the year is back for three days only vapour thursday get excited to get up to 80 on everything all the way they love weight as may 4th. So mark your calendar and start filling your card we style every home you were diagnosed with thyroid . Disease a long time ago and year after year, you weathered the storm and just lived with the damage that was left behind . But even after all this time, your Thyroid Disease could still change restoration is still possible learn how you could give your eyes a fresh start at ted help. Com this is a hot flash this is a hot flash but this is our nadh flash for moderate to severe Vasomotor Symptoms due to menopause. Vl says the first and only Prescription Treatment that directly blocks a source of hot flashes and night with 100 hormone free vios, you can have fewer hot flashes and more nadh flashes vios reduces the number and severity of Hot Flashes De Night for some women, it can start working in its early as one week dont use vios if you have cirrhosis, severe kidney problems, kidney failure, or take sip when a two inhibitors increase Liver Blood Test values may occur. Your doctor will check them before and during treatment. Most common side effects include stomach pain, diarrhea, difficulty sleeping, and back pain good. Again, ask your doctor about hormone free visa and enjoy more, not lashes your skin is ever changing take care of it with gold ponds age renew formulations of seven moisturizers and three vitamins. For all your skins gold bond one aleve works all day. So i can keep working just want to leave 12 hours of uninterrupted pain relief or leave. Who do you take it for and for fast topical pain relief child leave x. Were still going for that nice catch. Were still going for that perfect pizza. And with higher stroke risk from aphid not caused by a heart valve problem, were going for better treatment than warfarin eloquent, eloquent reduces stroke risk and has less major bleeding. Over 97 of Eloquence Patients did not experience a stroke dont stop taking eloquence without talking to your doctor as this may increase your risk of stroke, aliquots can cause serious and in rare cases, fatal bleeding dont take eloquence if you have an Artificial Heart Valve or abnormal more bleeding while taking, you may bruise more easily or take longer for bleeding to stop, get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising, it may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. The number one cardiologists prescribed blood thinner. Ask your doctor about eloquence its a new day one were our shared values propel us towards a more secure future. Through august of partnership built upon cuttingedge american, australian and british technologies will develop stateoftheart next generations that and build something stronger together security, dickey peace and prosperity for america and our allies we are Going Forward instead, award together im Zachary Cohen in washington, and this is cnn are continuing to get new details tonight about what was said during testimony. The former president s historic hush money criminal trial, john berman has been combing through todays transcript to give us more indepth youre standing david peckers testimony would have you found there are moments when david pecker, during his testimony, particularly on direct with the prosecutor, josh steinglass, talks about whether he knew what he was doing was illegal, and theres this one exchange where josh steinglass, the prosecutor, says, were you aware of the expenditures by corporations made for the purpose of influence . Once the intellection made in coordination with or at the request of a candidate or a campaign or unlawful david pecker says, yes. Steinglass says, did either you or ami every report to the federal Election Commission in 2016 that am i had made a 150,000 payment to Karen Mcdougal. Pecker says, no we did not. Steinglass asked, why did in my make this purchase of Karen Mcdougal story pecker, we purchased the story so it wouldnt be published by any organization. Steinglass. And why did you not want it to be published by any other organization . Pecker i didnt want we didnt want the story to embarrass mr. Trump or embarrassed or hurt. The campaign. And thats just one of the many times, or pecker indirect basically said this was for the campaign, not for a personal reason. Its incredibly important because as we keep hearing from this gentleman, like whats the crime here . Theres the crime that this is an Illegal Campaign contribution that is funneled through funneled through ami american media, the National Enquirer for the benefit of donald charles. I was a Campaign Contribution because its money spent for the benefit of the campaign. Oh, come on. You dont think thats tucker gave some really important im testimony today about that where he said that when it got close to the campaign, trump express concern about stories coming out about allegations of affairs with him and how it would impact that the campaign as opposed to prior dealings when trump express concern about the impact on his family. And so to shore up this argument that it was a campaign donation, that testimony by petal good contrasting how trump approached and expressed his concerns about those allegations crucial evidence that is crucial evidence because he and i talked about it has to be substantially affecting the president ial campaign as opposed to substantially affecting his family. So that hundred and 50, that hundred, 50 1,000 was a lot more valuable. His to campaign then a couple more ads on jeopardy. I mean, that was a real that was a real benefit keeping that story under the covers tactical decision that the defense has to make here, which is do they continue to fight that point, whether there was some substantial campaign motivation because to me its so clean here maybe it wasnt 100 , but it doesnt have to be as we talked about last night, its so clear there was a substantial campaign motivation there. How could there possibly not have been in that testimony goes right to that point. So theres there comes a point. Every good Defense Lawyer says, im picking my battles. Im not going to fight every single step of this because you lose credibility. Clearly, theyre fighting it, their rights there tactical decision, but maybe mistake it just to be clear and we dont have a graphic for this one also, but there were other moments too, where david pecker says this was for the campaign. There was that moment in trump tower where he was being thanked by donald trump. This is an exchange there. Pecker says he asked me how i was doing. I said im okay. He asked me how karen was doing and i told he asked hows karen doing . Hows our girl, hows My Girl House are girl doing . He said then i said shes shes riding her articles, shes quiet, shes easy. Things are going fine. So he said, i want to thank you for handling the mcdougal situation. Then he said, i want to he also said i want to thank you for the doormans story. For the doorman situation in the question from the prosecutor is and what did you understand mr. Trump to be thanking you for regarding the Karen Mcdougal story in the doorman. I felt he was thanking me for buying them and for not publishing any of the stories in helping the way i did. And why was he so appreciative as a prosecutor . The answer he said that the stories could be very embarrassing question, what did you understand that to mean . Answer. I felt that it was going to be very embarrassing to him. His family, and the campaign. The point there to le why hes not conceding its because if his lawyers conceded at conceded. Now, what do they have . Left . I think even david pecker started telegraphing or were going to see in the second half, uh, but, but this records about trump, the micromanager. Hes talking about trump focusing on the payment focusing invoices, not the what i call it call the cio and the Clouds Defense where im above at all. I dont know the details, but the opposite, a man is focused on the details a man is focused on, whereas money is going and someone whos not allowing Michael Cohen the authority to make decisions, bunch of money, which that narrative, which theyre trying to put forth with a very wellprepared witness, as they said, my first question would have been, how many times you made the prosecutor 40 or 50 to prepare your testimony, it flies in the face of everything we heard of Donald Trumps presidency he wasnt a detailoriented guy. He didnt want to read thick memos. He just wanted to sit with people here like the top headlines. He didnt want the details. So now they try to paint a picture of a totally different guy that we heard about for four. Yeah. But but the difference is, i mean, this is you know, theres a big difference between being interested in the monday once israel, whats going on, israel and with local affairs whats going on in the 150, maybe hes telling a story and i didnt mean for it. I think were right where i would go to your question if i was the defense or i think focusing on was donald trump part of the falsification, the accounting, theres a tape coming up in this trial, the secret tape that Michael Cohen made of his client, donald trump. Thats really going to help the defense on that. And what weve heard, weve played it here many, many times. But in essence, trump is sort of click who lives he goes, he knows theyre paying. Hes very much on board with paying to silence. Its Karen Mcdougal. Theyre talking about. And he just keeps going. I dont know what are we getting. Cohen says, leave it to me and alan. I got it. No, no, no, you dont worry im handling thats the crop that that would be what i would argue and im sorry, please. The province at some point it starts to look like its just not credible that i can see this much and i can see this much, but i wont concede this, right. I was involved in the scheme that im now conceding with credible arguably, but at some point the notion. So i was involved in the scheme to make an Illegal Campaign donation and i was involved in this scheme to sort of pay off Michael Cohen, but i wasnt involved in the part about how it was booked in my companys records. Now, arguably that is the defense that is their best defense. But at some point, if hes involved in all the other parts of this scheme, i think its reasonable to say, well, maybe he was in involved in this part of it was checking to make sure that the payment was made in cash. That does point to a level of of interests in the sort nittygritty of the details. Im john, how to the Defense Poke Holes are trying to poke holes in peckers recollection of one of the ways the recollection well, theyve near two different ways. They try to poke holes in the prosecution here. One was to talk about maybe david pecker is memory the other. And you talked about this earlier. Was this yes, this is all standard operating procedure. This whole scheme of buying stuff is just what the enquirer did and theres an exchange to that effect, a meal beauvais, the defense Attorney Says this relationship that you had with President Trump, this mutually beneficial relationship, you had similar relationships with other people, right . David pecker says, i did meaning that there were other people for what you would provide a heads up if there was a potentially negative story correct . Becker says, yes, beauvais and other people that you would promote the National Enquirer because it was good and it was good for its good for you and good for them, right . Pecker says, yes, beauvais. And that included celebrities, right . Pecker . Yes. And most celebrities wanted positive treatment and ill public occasions, right . Bakker, they do. And you had a relationship like this with other politicians correct . Becker says, yes. And you are aware that many politicians work with immediate inner try to promote their image, right . Pecker says, yes, and promote their brand pecker says yes to facilitate their campaign, correct . Pecker says yes standard brink procedure, as you understand it, correct . David pecker says yes. And in fact that another place david becker says, the first time he heard the phrase catch and kill was from investigators when they were asking him about this, they say before this investigation started, you had not heard the phrase catch and Kill David Becker says, thats correct. I thought that was a very pretty skillful crossexamining and a good read, write, and even, even better you should have taken that law school. But anyway but isnt the answer. So what ultimately you know, he he hadnt covered up for other celebrities, they werent running for president. He didnt pay 150,000. What was covered right Arnold Schwarzenegger he ran for governor at some point, but we dont know when or what he did for Arnold Schwarzenegger. This was so different from all those other searches. Im not saying youre wrong from what i was told them, people in the courtroom today, it was very pretty similar what he did for Arnold Schwarzenegger. In fact, there was a lot of examination today on our and schwartz a day urine and what he had done for him. So well see. Thank you. Ever everyone are special primetime coverage of these two Big Trump Trials continues next switch to shopify. So you can build it better scale is faster and sell more much more take your business to the next stage when you switch to shopify. To me, harlem is home, is also your body last one, everyone i asked myself, why does it pilates exist in harlem . So i started my own studio, get in a brickandmortar in new york is not easy. Chase inke as supported us from studio one to studio three. When you start small you need some big help and cej think with that for me, earn up to 5 cash back Home Business essentials. But the chase Ink Business Cash part and Chase For Business make more of whats yours . Youre calling. Some people find theres at an early age. Others later in life no matter when you find it. Consider yourself lucky because as it becomes your everything are calling was to build trucks. And thats why trucks are what we do we put our everything in every truck so that when you find your calling nothing can stop me from answering when the jinx came out, i thought, oh, my god on bob has a friend eats blind loyalty. Turns out, when you have a whole lot of money people are willing to do things for you what do you do when your best friend kills your other best friend Robby Surprises and surprises that jinx partner two streaming exclusively on macs work play link relief, work, play, blanking, really the only three and one extended release formula for dry eyes, like don for new this is about the news. Slim tv has the same News Programming you love starting at 40 a month. Its the same News Programming you love starting at 40 a month. Thats what i just said, right . Its this sunday, mr. Less, starting at 40 a month her pharmacy has been in business for nearly 100 years a wife and i have run it from the last 30 American Technology is making its more efficient and customerfriendly. We hes online tools to fill a prescriptions, process insurance claims, and make deliveries but some in washington want to undermine the Technology Tools we rely on. Their misguided agenda will empower are foreign adversaries and hurt Small Businesses like ours are leaders, deep, i dont want you to move. Im gonna miss you so much. You realize well have Internet Waiting for us at the new place, right . Oh, we know. We just like making a scene. Transferring your services has never been easier. Get connected on the day of your move with the xfinity app. Can i sleep over at your new place . Can katie sleep over tonight . Sure, honey this generation is so dramatic move with xfinity. This instore and online. News night with abdullah. Next on cnn close captioning brought to you by mesobook her firm