be a cooperator in the other matters. but having been named here is the key. ultimately, though, this court will look to make sure that the matters of justice are not fatally undermined by somebody saying listen, it would be a shame if it s a nice house you ve got here, it would be a shame if anything happened to it. or i want you not to testify against me. or on twitter or truth social any way of making someone feel intimidated enough. what that threshold looks like can be different for every defendant. a generalized statement on truth social about an issue with the justice system or a complaint about a prosecutor or a complaint about him feeling railroaded, these are all things that might not rise to the level. however, a specified threat, a specified statement that would make somebody less likely to feel compelled or interested in testifying, that s a serious one. laura, i also want to take a step back and talk about john eastman generally. he was at one point a very
and then they can be released. but there will be a question of how long all of them including donald trump will be in that jail and exactly what donald trump s release terms might be. can we learn anything from these early deals for eastman and hall that relate to the president s case, or is that dealt with entirely differently? for instance, on the question of mug shots and fingerprints, for instance. does this particular co-defendant have to be subjected to that in the way that the president, the former president might not be? yeah, we haven t actually learned how that process is going to play out. this is something that s being done by the prosecutors and the court is signing off on it. the people who do the processing, the mug shots, the fingerprinting, the searches over at the jail, that s the sheriff s office. so another entity entirely. so what we re seeing here right now, it s just a one-page set of terms. but releasing these people for these charges on these substantial am
course, you can be a fugitive. you can have a warrant in defense of a bounty. obviously not lethal. on one s head to have you return to court. this indication to give this sort of bond means a judge said you don t pose a threat to society, a public safety risk and perhaps even a flight risk because i believe this $100,000 is going to guarantee you re going to show back up for your trial date. i will note, though, in this he has to report to pretrial every 30 days meaning you re passing a drug test, you re checking in with somebody every so often, and perhaps the most important thing here, boris is that he cannot communicate in any way either through intimidation or otherwise to a co-defendant. 19 people, essentially. or to a witness in this case. which means that at some point you re going to hear from fani willis s team to say who are the witnesses that could be in this case. this happened in the jack smith case as well. down in mar-a-lago. the co-defendants of walt nauta and carlos d
undermine justice. however, he also is the person according to at least one person, mr. jacobs, who said he believed that he would lose this argument in front of the supreme court 9-0. remember that famous statement. 9-0. except he thought because he was the clerk of clarence thomas once maybe he could lean on him in some way. at the end of the day, though, the most important things to think about, because of that disbarment proceeding you mentioned, on january 6th in front of congress he did not testify. he pled the fifth multiple times. we saw it played over and over again. in the disbarment, though, he took the stand. he testified. which means that everything he said there can now come in into future things including this very proceeding. fascinating stuff. laura coates, thanks so much for the analysis. thanks for sticking around too. where am i going to go? brianna. a wet and muddy mess in california. we are live from one of the hardest-hit areas that s now cleaning up from
state prosecution overseeing state voting laws is going to be extremely important in how elections are run from here on out. but the federal charges do not give the side eye to them, boris because they re very significant. but if he is the president he could pooh-pooh that and do away with it. no sideeye for me. no side eye. we should also note a slew of georgia officials from the governor, lieutenant governor, the secretary of state have all said that the elections there were fair and free and there was no supposed and these are republicans too. precisely. precisely. so on to the question of mark mead oelz, meadows, trump s former chief of staff. he s now essentially trying to get a federal court to intervene in the state charges to dismiss them saying i was just carrying out my duty as chief of staff, following orders. does that have legs? could that stand up? n. court? well, he will argue that in court. but the criteria is one, you had to be acting under color of offic