right now former president trump is inside of a new york courthouse and he is watching this 250 million dollar civil fraud trial threatening his business empire. trump, his adult sons, as well other the trump board executives are accused of inflating financial statements to obtain favorable loans and insurance deals. >> trump is set to take the witness stand next week as the final defense witness. let's take you live outside of the courthouse. with cnn's kara denounced. kara, we have seen the former president make multiple public statements opining on how the trial is going. how have things played out so far? -- [inaudible] expert witness testifying, this is an accounting professor from nyu. he has given the trump side the strongest, clearest, offense so far from an expert witness. what he is testifying today as he examined the financial statements that are at the heart of this case, the accusations that they inflated the value of properties on them and then use that to get better terms on loans and insurance. he testified, unequivocally, that there is no evidence whatsoever of accounting fraud he said that my analysis shows the financial statements for all of the years were not materially misstated. the judge intervened here and asked him, are you saying that the attorney general's complaint has no merit? he said, that is absolutely my opinion. he went on to say that there are some errors in the report, in the financial statements. he said that those are not necessarily fraud. he said that that is common when there are these on audited financial statements used by sophisticated binders. really giving the trump side their strongest offense. we heard from the former president when he was leaving that one of the brakes and he praised that expert accountant. take a listen. >> this is a highly respected man. i do not know him. he is an expert witness. he found no fraud, whatsoever! he found no accounting fraud, whatsoever. like everyone else he said, what are we doing here? >> the judge has already found that the financial statements in this case are fraudulent. found that trump has committed repeated and persistent fraud. much of trump's defense is also playing towards the appeals court because they have acknowledged, they accept that the judge will probably rule against them and the civil fraud trial. they are making their case in creating a record so it can be heard by an appeals court. on that note, we did learn some news today. the appeals court in new york is agreeing to continuously stay. that is they are not going to allow the dissolution of trump's businesses until this trial, and the appeal, is wrapped up. that when favor trump today. the attorney generals office doubling down on their statements, their commitment, that trump has committed fraud. in response to trump's comments, new york attorney general, letitia james, tweeted that they have already proven a massive fraud that trump has committed. this case, as you say, will continue with trump being on the stand next week as the final witness in their defense. for us, breonna? >> kara scannell, live outside of the courthouse for. thank you for that report. let's talk more about this with cnn legal analyst norm eisen. norm, starting with this expert testimony that you heard there, what is your analysis of how much weight this will have? >> well, and we know experts are, sometimes, available for hire. mr. bartov is a academic who works in this field. there has been substantial testimony that the financial statements are fraudulent. to attempt to justify them defies the witnesses who have testified that they are fraudulent, the exports for the state, the judges own finding where he had already granted partial summary judgment of fraud. and, if i may say so, common sense. how can you say that an apartment that is a little more than 10,000 square feet is 30,000 square feet? i don't care how many professors come in, are they going to put a math professor on next to say that 30,000 and 10,000 are equal? i think the weight of the evidence is that there were material misstatements. not just of the apartment, but 40 wall street, seven spraying, mar-a-lago. this case is going to be lost by donald trump. the battle will be on appeal. the reason trump is in court today, the 12 punch as he is going to attempt to back up what professor bartov has said to create that appellate record. >> trump has said something about a appellate court decision that he claims the judge engoron is ignoring. i think we may have that clear. let's play. at >> the judge, as you know, overturned by the appellate division of the new york state supreme court. which is a higher core, much higher court than where we are right now. the judge refused to acknowledge it. this case would be over. that was about 90% of the cases, having hit that statute of limitations. this case should be over! >> norm was shaking his head of that clip was playing. >> look, trump and his lawyers have been back and forth to the appellate courts, over and over again, since that decision on statute of limitations came down. if the appellate court thought that they were being divided, they would've shut the case down. they have declined to do that. trump is mixing apples and oranges. yes, there was a statute of limitations issue that paired the case back. as you know, ivanka trump, as a result, is out of the case. it does not invalidate the attorney generals entire case. as is so often with the former president, he is not exactly, 100%, candid and truthful in how he is describing legal events. seeing things, perhaps, the way he wants to see them? >> exactly. exactly there. so, let's talk about the gag order that is in place here. i think it is really worth mentioning. he cannot comment about the court. he got in trouble about that before. there are still things he can talk about. the judge, a.g., testimonial, whole lot more. what is interesting here is having been fined a couple of times he is now staying within these boundaries. they have been enforced. i wonder if you think that is going to be a roadmap for judges in other cases, specifically the federal election subversion case here in d.c.? >> i do, brianna. we followed together the vicissitudes of the state gag order and the federal gag order, on and off again. the state order, which i think is a preview of what will happen with the federal gag order here in d.c. for the coming march trial, the state courts have now turned that gag order back on. today, trump was brought to heel. he had a press availability before the court, no attacks on judicial staff. he had one after, he appeared in court and again, no attacks. no attacks in courts. it shows that he can be controlled. he is a rational actor. will that hold? will he make a strategic choice to politically inflame his base by violating the gag order and having some drama? he may do it but if he does it today's compliance shows that that will be intentional. these gag orders are consistent with the first amendment, as the new york appellate courts that mr. trump celebrated have found now. >> norm, we got some breaking news moments before we got on the air about trump's revived efforts to dismiss the federal election subversion cases. essentially, his team is appealing a decision that rejected his effort to dismiss the case on certain grounds. walk us through what this means for the broader case. >> unlike some of the arguments we just heard, this is not frivolous or made-up. there is a serious legal question here. one that trump has lost and he will probably lose again on appeal. this is something that i worked on when i was in the white house counsel's office. presidents cannot, normally, be the subject of legal proceedings. it is called presidential immunity. it typically applies in the civil case. trump tried and his federal prosecution for alleged election overthrow here in b.c. to take that civil rule and apply it in a criminal case. hey, jack smith, i'm the president. you cannot prosecute me. judge chutkan said, no. that is a monarch of idea no one is above the law if you break the law as president, you get to be prosecuted. now he is appealing that to the d.c. circuit. he is going to try to get a stay. there will be a big fight about it. fundamentally i think judge chutkan was right. i have written about this, including for cnn. it is inimical to american law that there would be one person in our country who is never able to be held accountable for violating criminal laws simply because they are president. he also lost an important immunity decision in the civil context. but in criminal it is even more important. he will fail, it is a real issue. it is going to occasional lot of attention. there will be a big fight over whether the whole thing should be stayed. it is something else that we will be watching together in the weeks ahead. >> definitely. we hope that you will come back to break down the decision once it is made. norm alison, thank you so much. we want to focus on the nation's capital now where house republicans are escalating their probe into president biden. in the coming days it will take a key procedural step in formalizing their impeachment inquiry. the rules committee set to consider a resolution on that next tuesday. if it passes it will face a vote on the house floor. >> let's go now to cnn's manu raju. manu, tell us, how is this going to play out and why the gop is taking the step now? >> reporter: well, they want to show that this probe is escalating. they are arguing that they would have more powers in court if it comes down to it by having formal vote on the floor to authorize an inquiry. remember, this impeachment inquiry has been going on since then speaker kevin mccarthy announced that it would happen. this did not actually need to be a vote but they are taking the step, a symbolic gesture of sorts, with one they believe will be in even greater town to power. this is one where they have a narrow majority. democrats are gonna vote against this in lockstep. that means in this narrow republican majority, speaker johnson can only afford to lose three republican votes. with 18 republicans in biden districts that means the pressure will be on them. in talking to several of those members, including some from new york, they make it very clear that they will side with the speaker now but they are still uncertain about whether biden should be impeached. >> reporter: is it good politics to go down the route of impeachment? >> the fundamental responsibility for providing oversight and checks and bounds on the executive branch is not subjected to what is in the best political interest of anyone, or everyone. i did not come to washington to expel a member of congress or future president. the white house would do well by honoring subpoenas investigating in the investigation. >> you don't think it put moderate weakens in a tough spot? >> the moderate republicans, their constituents want to see this. i think people in moderate democrat districts want to see it, as well. >> reporter: that last comment from house oversight chairman, james comer, who plans to move forward with the contempt proceedings if hunter biden, the president's son, does not comply with a subpoena to be deposed behind closed doors by mid december. hunter biden's team says he will comply in public. he accuses republicans of cherry-picking testimony, including what they expect to be his, behind closed doors. that will not fly from comer. he tells me he does believe he has the votes to hold hunter biden in contempt if he does not comply. the question is, where does it go from here? do they actually have the votes for impeachment? can they draw the line between hunter biden's actions, joe biden's actions, suggesting the acted corruptly while in office. something that they have not done yet. these are all major questions as the president is headed here guys. >> manu, thank you for that report. live for us from capitol hill. today we have seen former president trump. he's trying to turn, as he does, so frequently the courthouse into a bit of a campaign stop. his gop rivals are busy stumping in iowa and new hampshire, hoping to seize any momentum they may have gained coming out of this debate last night. it was a night where you saw several candidates butting heads. others made some unexpected alliances. there were some direct attacks on trump who, of course, skipped the event altogether. >> do i think he was kidding when he said he was a dictator? all you have to do is look at the history. his conduct is unacceptable. he is unfit. >> it is not a job for someone who is pushing 80. we need someone who is younger. >> you cannot defeat democratic chaos with republican chaos. that is what donald trump gives us. >> is that enough to chip away at the league? >> cnn's jessica dean is here to break it all down. jessica, some feisty moments! the fourth debate. they have had time to adjust tactics. nikki haley was definitely the main target, i would say, yesterday. how much does this change the dynamic overall? >> well, just to remind everyone we are now 40 days from the iowa caucuses. the voters are going to tell us soon enough. we really have to underscore that until they start voting we can prognosticate, we can read the tea leaves, but i just like to remind people what i think we can glean from last night in terms of where the races today. nikki haley took a lot of incoming fire, as you both alluded to. she acknowledged it on the stage. a really illuminates her place in the race right now. having a lot of momentum going into the voting with a lot of wind and her back in a lot of support. we also saw florida governor ron desantis really stepping up and having a bigger debate performance and we've seen previously. he dominated more of the conversation. it came back to some of these culture wars, that is an issue when you talk to a team that is what they want to be talking about. that is where he feeley excels and consult to voters. especially the evangelical voters in iowa. taking a lot of that in the incoming. i want you to hear what she said earlier this morning. >> these fellas, they take every bit of that support us if it was going to them. they are just jealous that it is coming to me. you know, if you look last night it was very clear that we are surging in the polls. every one of those guys sees it, and they showed it. but we are picking into doing our battles. it is not worth dealing with vivek. >> she mentioned vivek ramaswamy, there, obviously, we had lots of clashes. chris christie stepped in to say to him, like, knock it off. that's enough. nikki haley we are obviously running against each other but what you are saying is crazy. it wasn't quite an alliance but he did step in there. we did hear from governor chris christie again really drilling down on his anti trump message. that is what you all have spoken with him, we have seen him time and time again come back to that message. he is looking towards new hampshire and those moderate republican voters. that is where he really feels like he can make a difference. that was more of the message that we heard from him last night on that stage. >> interesting that the others just thought, it's time for something new. it is not exactly a hatchet, right? >> he called them out on it. he said, trump was like voldemort from harry potter. the one who should not be. name >> he who shall not be named! yeah. there you go. >> jessica dean, thank you for that. be sure to watch the lead, as well. jake is going to have a one-on-one with former congresswoman, liz cheney. their conversation airs at five pm as she considers what she is going to do. maybe through her hat in the ring. >> potential third-party run for her. i'm sure jake we'll ask about that. still to come on new central, right now trustees that one i leave the league school holding emergency meeting hours after school president testified on capitol hill catching fire for her comments on antisemitism. plus, to russians are being accused of hacking former and current government officials all in an attempt to interfere with elections in the united kingdom. a crazy web to untangle when we come back! new developments to bring you right now. the university pennsylvania's board of trustees has just wrapped up an emergency meeting as school president, liz magill faces scathing criticism over her testimony at tuesday's capital heating over antisemitism and ivy league schools. -- the president of other universities are also under fire for statements in that hearing. matt, what are you hearing about this emergency meeting with the pen trustees? >> reporter: here is what we know, boris. this was a virtual gathering of the school's powerful board of trustees while it wasn't a formal meeting, we do know that it came together rather hastily. a university spokesperson telling me that this virtual gathering was organized around two pm yesterday. that timing is key because that is just a few hours after the governor of pennsylvania, josh shapiro, condemned penn's presidents testimony on capitol hill. she actually called to the board of trustees to me and decide whether not that testimony lives up to the schools values. we did not know what are the knot of liz was magill the central focus of this virtual gathering but you have to believe that it was the elephant in the room. this hearing in that testimony came under enormous scrutiny. in particular there is an exchange between liz magill and republican congresswoman elise to fonac. little to that exchange. >> i am asking, specifically calling for the genocide of, does that constitute bullying and harassment? >> if it is directed, severe and pervasive, it is harassment. >> so the answer is, yes? >> it is a context dependent decision. >> those answers faced intense urinary. we heard from billionaire bill ackerman calling on the penn president as well of presidents of harvard and m.i.t. to step down. the ceo of pfizer slammed, calling it one of the most disgraceful moments in the history of u.s. academia. even the white house had a way in making it clear there is no place for calls for genocide. the university of pennsylvania faces a moment of crisis, it is not clear whether or not liz magill will help lead the university's response to this crisis. >> how is she personally responding to this criticism now? >> reporter: after the hearing the university of pennsylvania's president, liz magill, did go on acts and tried to clear up her response. she clarified that the university does need to make some changes to their policies. listen to what liz magill said on twitter yesterday. >> in that moment i was focused on our universities long-standing policies aligned with the u.s. constitution that says speech alone is not punishable. i was not focused on, but i should've been, the irrefutable fact that a call for genocide of jewish people is a call for some of the most terrible violence human beings can perpetrate. i want to be clear, a call for genocide of jewish people is threatening, deeply so. >> reporter: now, that response was not enough to silence some of the universities biggest critics. jonathan greenblatt, the ceo of atl, was speaking to our colleague kate baldwin earlier. she said that that liz magill response looks like a hostage video. he said that she lost confidence in her ability to lead. >> matt egan. thank you so much for the update. breonna? this just in may have learned of now that president biden spoke today with israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu to, quote, discuss the latest developments in israel and gaza. this is happening at the strikes and the suffering are continuing in gaza today, exactly two months since the beginning of the war one hamas slaughtered some 1200 people in israel. israeli defense forces say they have breached hamas is, quote, defense lines in sever