invaded ukraine. the u.s. secretary of state eye to eye with the russian foreign minister. we ll get an update on their talks and the state of the war from key white house official john kirby. welcome to our viewers here in the united states and around the world. i m wolf blitzer and you re in the situation room. tonight the alleged anti-semitic plot uncovered in michigan is adding to fears for the safety of jewish americans and elected officials. cnn s pablo sandoval has all the details on the threats he s accused of making. reporter: tonight officials foil an alleged plot. a federal complaint filed in eastern michigan naming jack eugene carpenter ii as a defendant. sources telling cnn he was arrested just a day after allegedly posting disturbing anti-semitic threats online using the handle tempered reason. a law enforcement source telling cnn among those specifically targeted by carpenter michigan attorney general damon nestle. i was a target of the heavily armed defe
prosecutor said this is what he called a common sense case. do you think that s a winning argument, joey? you know a lot of us attorneys say that because at the end of the day no matter what you argue it comes down to the basic notions of human life and human experience. and what the roscushion is arguing is who could have done this? they re arguing as it relates to two shooters nonsense. it was one shooter and it was you. there were no other reasonable alternatives. they re arguing to the time line that initially you said you weren t even there. who would say that? in the event that they didn t, right, have something to hide. a normal person would suggest they were. you lie, you lie, you had no credibility. why should the jury believe you now? with regard to when it happened you were there right around the time that we believe the prosecution says that it occurred. who else possibly could have been the one who did this? and so i think the prosecution is saying it s not as complex as
saying immunity in this case should be limited when a president s speech is used to incite violence. wolf, i will note, though, doj in this brief is stopping short of specifically endorsing the idea former president trump incited any violence leading up to the capitol attack, just broadly saying if violence speech is used a president should not by immune. jessica, thanks very much for that report. also tonight we have new reporting on the turmoil within fox news after chairman rupert murdoch s admission under oath that lies were told on his network. i take it there s a lot of uncertainty and corporate intrigue at fox right now. reporter: wolf, there s uncertainty, anxiousness and new reporting tonight who at fox might be the sacrificial lamb for all this. as fox news deals with agonizing fallout from the dominion lawsuit and the bombshell revelation that the network driven by the lure of profits and ratings was willing to lie to its viewers about who won the
this is what we knew would happen in the protocol that could have happened if the jury had a question about this. we are told at this point that the jury has signaled to the clerk of court again at 6:41 p.m. that they have reached a verdict in the alec murdoch double murder case. he is charged with shooting and killing his 22-year-old son paul and his wife maggie nearly six weeks of the court proceeding and witnesses in the defense and the state presenting the case we are hoping to hear from the jury and the judge raising we will stay in close touch with you were all over this, we appreciative very much. we will take a quick break, much more after this.
watch once again those interviews that alex murdaugh did and also some of those key videos, the videos from the kennels perhaps, the snap chat video, both of those pulled from murdaugh s phone. perhaps they want to watch some of that. thank you very much let s bring in cnn legal analyst joey jackson and get some analysis right now. joey, the defense made their closing arguments today. you re a criminal defense attorney. how do you think they did? wolf, i think they did very well as it relates to raising reasonable doubt. the case has always been about three things, motive, number one. number two, the time line, and number three alternative explanations. what did they seek to do? on the issue of motive they sought to say that the prosecution s theory does not make sense. will you kill your wife and your son because you feel the world is close in on you as it relates to your financial crimes, right? you would not. and especiallyd husband, pivoting to the issue of the