the judge has said he considering appointing a special master to look int these failures in discovery. and that could have very serious consequences jeremy, let s just lay this out. because this trial hinges on whether fox news knowingly lie on air and now, fox news is in troubl for withholding evidence what in the world is going o here are the lawyers not even doing their jobs it s not a good look for th lawyers a few days away from trial. the last thing you want as a defendant in a defamation case as strong as this one s is t have the judge angry with you. because while a jury wil decide whether or not fo defamed dominion, the judg still has incredible power t determine the parameters of th arguments fox lawyers coul make to defend themselves. and right now, i was in th courtroom yesterday, steph, an i could tell just how gingerly the fox lawyers were tiptoeing around the judge
disregard toward the falsity o information they were puttin out on their airwaves, or that they actually knew that it was false. and this evidence, i think frankly, is just a nail in tha coffin on the backside, the lawyers and fox news itself may face repercussions. the judges said he s considering appointing a special master to look int these failures in discovery. and that could have very serious consequences jeremy, let s just lay this out. because this trial hinges on whether fox news knowingly lie on air and now, fox news is in troubl for withholding evidence what in the world is going o here are the lawyers not even doing their jobs it s not a good look for th lawyers a few days away from trial. the last thing you want as a defendant in a defamation case as strong as this one s is t have the judge angry with you. because while a jury wil decide whether or not fo
what happens around trump, the question is, was the governmen being actively, purposefully misled by trump s lawyers, and we know that the information that the trump s lawyers provided to the government about what trump had was not accurate we know that much. if you are the investigator, you want to know why is it tha the inaccurate information was provided to the governments? why didn t they say, we don have any more classified documents and then when they did a search of mar-a-lago they found dozens, and dozens, and dozens of them where they misled because th lawyers were trying to mislead them where they misled because it was a miscommunication, or where they missed that because donald trump was telling his lawyers to mislead them? and did the lawyers know tha trump was telling them false information when they relate that to the government in some ways, explaining a cas
my panel back with me, michael are you at all surprised tha jack smith is looking at obstruction? no because, look, if yo look at what happens in this investigation, this case and what happens around trump, the question is, was the governmen being actively, purposefully misled by trump s lawyers, and we know that the information that the trump s lawyers provided to the government about what trump had was not accurate we know that much. if you are the investigator, you want to know why is it tha the inaccurate information was provided to the governments? why didn t they say, we don have any more classified documents and then when they did a search of mar-a-lago they found dozens, and dozens, and dozens of them where they misled because th lawyers were trying to mislead them where they misled because it was a miscommunication, or where they missed that because donald trump was telling his lawyers to mislead them? and did the lawyers know tha trump was telling them false
as frequent as they are in federal courts so what i m saying, jen, i that if district attorney brag issues - or hands down an indictmen that is focused on hush mone payments, that doesn t preclud him from continuin investigations into othe potential crimes and that is consistent wit malpractice in almost ever state i know of. peoples expectations, i could be another case you coul be looking into. this may not be the last w hear from the da s office on trump and a potentia indictment at the time you had handed i off, had you approved an indictment of trump on his finances before you left office? again, jim, i have said tha i am not going to talk about m specific discussions with th lawyers in my office but as i ve said, even had i made that decision it would ve been mr. briggs decision t review, because our, work we