get a free line of unlimited intro for 1 year when you buy one unlimited line. plus, get an eligible 5g phone on us. switch to xfinity mobile today! your own team together with custom gear, get started today at close captioning brought to you by rula law, iconic brands up to 70% off retail had rula law.com, rubella >> you never faithful sees the deals on top before their car today tonight on 360, the supreme court agrees to decide whether donald trump is immune from prosecution for >> election subversion and throws into chaos the timeline of a criminal trial. also tonight, new evidence. the former president cannot read as the money to pay new york's 450 plus million dollars. civil judgment against him, evidenced supplied by his own legal team. how hard up he is. and later the results and so president biden's annual checkup, the questions it answers, and those it doesn't. good evening. thanks for joining us. we begin a very busy night at the supreme court where about two months from now, nine men and women will hear arguments about whether presidents should enjoy total criminal immunity for their acts while in office. perhaps even up to and including as appeals court judge, florence pan got trump, attorney john sauer to concede, ordering navy seals to murder a political rival. now that notion, the need for total immunity is at the heart of the former president's appeal, which the high court today agreed to take up, goes to a question as old as the country are presidents above the law oral arguments are set for the week of april 22. the court's decision could then come by june and even if it goes against mr. trump, his january 6 trial is on hold until then. we'll be joined shortly by constitutional scholar laurence tribe. but for sand chief legal affairs correspondent paula reid. so what does this move by the court mean for the former president and for jack smith? >> well, i understand in speaking with sources on trump's legal team, they're still not confident they're going to win on the merits of this issue of absolute presidential immunity. but they know they are winning on their larger strategy to delay, delay, delay his federal cases until after the election. if trump is reelected, he can have as attorney general dismissed jack smith, and these cases. so great news. for him. but this is a considerable blow for the special counsel, jack smith. this is a second time the supreme court has rejected his pleas to just weigh in and quickly resolve this question of immunity so he can move along with his case. as you noted, he's oral arguments or not until april 20 seconds. so we expect we probably won't get a decision until late june the judge overseeing the federal election subversion case has said she would want to give the two sides two months to prepare for trial, which pushes it into the late summer, anderson and just makes it not impossible, but much less likely that this trial will go before november. >> so the oral arguments set for the week of april, 20 seconds. how does that schedule fit with the foreign president? there's other legal proceedings. >> anderson, i'm going to need the help of our handy calendar graphic to go through all of this. it is so complicated. >> we know the first >> criminal trial that trump is expected to face is in late march, begins on march 20. that is the so-called hush money case. the district attorney though frames this as an election interference case. they argue that the hush money trump paid to former adult film star stormy daniels ahead of the 2016 election was meant to interfere without election to influence it. now, that trial is expected to go until maybe early may. and then you see the classified documents case is on the calendar. i'll tell you it's really penciled in for late may and tomorrow, i leave for florida because the judge overseeing that case, it's actually holding a scheduling hearing on friday, anderson, it is widely expected that she will delay that case. the question is, will it be delayed once will be delayed multiple times. will it go before november? it's an open question then you see, of course the political events, but the fulton county case is scheduled for august. that's when fani willis previously said she wanted to bring that case again, a state case, also a case that's outside the pardon power. but right now, these efforts to disqualify willis are likely going to delay those proceedings. so it's really a wild-card down there in georgia, if any cases will start in august and if they do anderson, they're expected to go on for for months. it's unclear if trump will be tried. so right now the only thing we know for sure is that trump is currently expected to face his first criminal trial in manhattan, starting in just a few weeks. >> paula reid, thanks very much. former federal prosecutor and bestselling supreme court biographer, jeffrey toobin joins us also, cnn senior legal analyst elie honig. and cnn's kaitlan collins, who anchors the source at the top of the next our jefferson is a victory for donald trump big a, big, a big victory, you know, one of the things you learned in law school is that sometimes procedure is even more important than substance and i still think it's very likely that donald trump is going to lose this case on the merits. >> but if he didn't, court would rule >> against the supreme court will say he does not have immunity for all his actions as president. but if they say that at the end of june, which is the likely calendar at this point, that will make it almost impossible, not entirely out of the question, but almost impossible for this trial to go forward before the end of before the election. and that's what trump mourns, wants more than anything >> they could have just decided not to weigh in on this and defer to the appeals process and they could have if they had done that judge chutkan in washington could have started this week in doing the pretrial proceedings that could get the case going in plenty of time before the election, but they didn't do that. and that's why it's a big one. >> and for trump, so elie me oral arguments, april 20 seconds. what does that say about the court's view of the urgency of this? >> i think there's a lot of frustration out there from people who see this and say, oh wow, now donald trump, in all likelihood, not impossible, but in all likelihood will not be tried before the election. but one of the lessons i take away from this is this supreme court doesn't care about that. they don't share jack smith's sense of urgency. and i think there's a couple of ways you can look at this decision to take the case. there is a way to look at and say, well, they've they've done donald trump a great favor, which certainly they have in the outcome. but there's also some truth to this. this is a classic case that the us supreme court would take. i agree with jeff. i think they're going to rule against donald trump, but this is an unknown issue. we've never had a ruling from supreme court directly on the question of criminal immunity. it goes to the heart of executive powers, of separation of powers. so as jack smith himself argued to the court two months ago, this is a paradigmatic case, a classic case that the supreme court wouldn't showed take. >> so jeff would there's still be time to hold a trial. i mean, if they ruled at the end of june it depends. >> i mean, it's very it's very hard to know at this point. i mean, let's just work the schedule forward. end of june decision the judge has already said there are two months of pretrial proceedings, at least that are necessary, that takes you approximately up to labor day could you start a trial at labor day when it's one of the defendants is a candidate for president the justice department has a policy that says the justice department should not interfere, should not take action on the eve of an election that this is came up in the james comey situation unclear if that applies to a judge scheduling a trial, and whether merrick garland will instruct jack smith not to proceed because of this policy, you think i think it's going to be very difficult, i think doj is still going to try to get this case, and i think as soon as the case comes down for the supreme court and i say started in august, start it whenever you need, but important understand there's going to be there's always a tug of war prosecutors, defense lawyers, prosecutors usually want a quicker trial. defense lawyers want to push it back. it's up to judge chutkan. she will be the one to decide. am i willing to start a case late summer? >> kaitlan, what reaction have you been hearing from any of the form of presence alice? >> they're overjoyed tonight i mean, they viewed this as a huge win for them. they don't think that they're going to win on the merits of this. but when this decision just to review this, what the ruling from the appeals court here that trump does not enjoy blanket immunity as president, simply just taking that up helps them achieve their strategy here anderson, which was to delay all of the trials. but specifically this one which they were incredibly concerned about. and now they have succeeded potentially with this and you know, elie saying it is up to judge chutkan. of course it is, but you have to look at the legal landscape here. and that's what trump's team is doing because of course, we've also got the classified documents case and florida that's still has to be scheduled. and if it gets pushed and that is something that's happening when this june decision comes out from the supreme court, then the trump team does not believe that this january this case is going to go forward because they believe it's going to be too late. they can't just restart that trial immediately in june once the supreme court decision comes out, and i think that's a really pivotal moment here could be a pivotal moment this election and of course may remind you this election case was supposed to go to trial starting next week here in washington. now it is an open question of whether it ever goes to trial. >> it all. >> jeff, i want to play the now infamous clip from the dc appeals court hearing last month, one of trump's lawyers argued that he could have seal team six kilo political opponent. >> it a president order seal team six to assassinate a political rival. that's an official act in order to seal team six, he would have to be and would speedily be impeached and convicted before the criminal prosecution. >> but if it would be no criminal prosecution nope, criminal liability for that. >> chief justice's opinion, remember against masterson and and our constitution vision and the plain language of the impeachment judgment clause. all clearly three, suppose that what the founders were concerned about was not asked you a yes, no, yes or no question? could a president who ordered seal team six to assassinate a political rival who was not impeached. he be subject to criminal prosecution. >> if he were impeached and convicted first, answer. your answer is my answer is qualified. yes. but but >> that's why i think this case could have been disposed of with just denying crt and let the case proceed. >> this is an >> easy case. yes, it's a profound issue, but this is an easy case that the dc circuit, i think demise almost all the arguments against against the trump made. and this is why i think it is a frustrating decision because it means that there's going to be delay to what seems like an inevitable conclusion that trump does not have this immunity is also now we're in a situation where the trial that is going forward is the one that's always been considered a kind of the weakest, the thinness grewal of the bunch, the alvin bragg, it's true that one is going to happen. i mean, that case is going to start picking their jury on march 25th, but yes. i mean, you know, our political experts can talk about if that's an ideal scenario, but this is the way it's played out. and by the way some blame here has to be laid at the feet of the justice department because it took doj two-and-a-half-plus years, almost 2.3 quarters years to indict this case, the indictment came down august of 2023, and they left themselves with a year and change between now and trial. and by the way, you can see this immunity issue coming the moment that indictment drop that had to cause delay. so yes, the supreme court has allowed this to get carried on, but doj bears and fall here. kaitlan with the foreign president's team, relish the idea of him being on trial during the convention or during the fall. and would that play into their narrative? >> i think it depends on which case it is. i mean, it would it would play into their narrative in the sense of they're arguing that he is being politically persecuted, which of course we know that these cases were brought long before the election. it's just the sense of how long it's taken and the way that they've sought to delay them. but when it comes to which ones they fear the most, the election case is certainly up up there. the classified documents case. they've seemed to grow more confident about. i mean, that's just their speculation that doesn't really actually mean what it will bear on the case and what that will actually look like. but it would help them make their argument. but i think it's actually the alvin bragg case that you just mentioned there that is going to be something that they're pointing to and given it is one of the weaker one once when you look at all of these and just what the allegations at the heart of the prosecutions are. they believe that one will be more effective in helping boost him. and every time he's been indicted, other republicans and former challengers of his like ron desantis will say it only his boosted him. they believe that that case in new york is only going to help boost him. it is a nod of all theory that at the heart of it. so that is something that could be helpful. i don't think that they believe that the january 6 case, if he's actually on trial for that before the election, would be helpful to them. >> so he might win that case. i mean, imagine what a gift that would be if he not only is on trial, but gets acquitted. >> and that's the only case it goes before the election. elie honig. thank you. kaitlan collins, caitlin has guest on the 09:00 or republican senator mitt romney, look forward to that. jeff toobin is gonna be back shortly joining us now, constitutional scholar, supreme court litigator, harvard law school professor laurence tribe. so professor tribe, why do you think this supreme court decided to take? this up instead of just letting the appeals court ruling stand >> well, i think both eli and jeff are right that the supreme court sees that because a very fundamental issue the question isn't, why did they decide to take it up but why didn't they take it up in december? there's nothing new under the sun here fact is, if they shared the view that it matters to get this case tried and to get it to verdict one way or another to an acquittal or to a conviction before the election. so that the american people are aware of who they're voting for? are they voting for someone who committed the serious crimes that are alleged here or not? if they share that sense that there's an imperative public necessity, they could have decided to leap frog the court of appeals grant certiorari back in december. even now, having decided to take the case, it's obvious that the dynamic within the court is leaning very heavily pro trump, because although everyone seems to agree that if the end of the day the court is not going to say that former presidents have absolute immunity from any criminal prosecution for anything they might do while in office. we all know the end of the story >> so why the delay? >> as long as they did to issue this order is amazing. allowing months to last before they hear argument is even crazier. we now know that the odds of this case reaching a verdict before the election very low. >> so >> this case really gives the gives meaning to the phrase, justice delayed is justice denied? whichever side of this issue you're on. it's crazy that the court processed it this way it doesn't suggest go ahead. >> is it possible that the supreme court, i mean, i know they do things the way they do things and they have their own timetable. but i mean, could they if they wanted to if enough of them wanted to speed it up? >> well, no question. just remember bush v. gore when the state of florida wanted to keep counting ballots, they handled everything in a matter of weeks, not months. and between the final decision that they reviewed and the oral argument, there were only a few days in between the oral argument and the decision. there was only one day >> it doesn't make >> any sense to stretch this out this way >> just >> the fact that they are waiting two months when all of the issues have been teed up, where everyone knows how story ends is disgraceful. frankly, the way they phrase the question presented is scary and its implications. instead of asking whether a former president has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for trying to prevent the next president from taking off office. narrow question. the only question they had to decide, they put the broadest possible question whether and to what extent does the former president have immunity for acts alleged to be within the reach of his office well, trump alleges that everything is within the reach of his office jack smith alleges the opposite >> right now. it looks like they could decide that broad abstract question and then send it back to the court of appeals for a further decision applying their new criteria on whether that immunity, whatever it is, and there's not going to be much extends to what was charged in this case. that is a formula for having this case never decided, especially if donald trump wins and gets dismissed. so this is not the way a court that wants to preserve the rule of law and wants to satisfy the public need for an answer to whether donald trump was guilty of trying to overturn the election criminally >> so the way a court >> realizes the importance of that issue would have foreseen who who on the court does makes this decision. i mean, is this supreme court justice who decides what the timing certainly it would take five and this case, the five would surely have to include the chief justice. i don't think that they could get five votes without him. >> it's possible that >> gorsuch and or for kavanaugh and barrett were part of this group but what we do know is that there are some justices who are not interested in seeing this resolved one way or another before the election. that much we can be sure of. you can also be sure because they obviously struggled over the former relation of what question the parties should argue we can be sure that they want to use this case to settle a whole broad range of issues contrary to their supposed practice of deciding no more than you must decide. in fact, the chief justice once famously said, if we don't have to decide something, that means we have to avoid deciding it he's obviously violated that mandate here and those struggled with in the court results in injustice for the nation. >> or a stripe. thank you for your time. >> thanks, anderson. because >> next to congressman way in one who served as democratic counsel in the first trump impeachment. the other former constitutional law professor and later yet another bizarre twist and the legal uproar surrounding georgia's election subversion case against the former president and the effort to get the district attorney taken off the case, how this different person on the witness and waffled and surprise the defense will be right back >> we're building a better postal service all parts working in sync to move your business poleward. with the streamlines shipping network and new high-speed processing and delivery centers for more value, more of a liability, and more on-time deliveries. the united states postal service is built for how you business and how you business is with simple, affordable, and reliable shipping. usps ground an advantage >> i am an unholy terror. but lately it's just a ruse i can't let them see. i'm happy. it's prime video. all my shows and movies are here. it's nonstop, joy boundless math, convulsions of for valeti >> so nice >> boston. >> all your streaming in one app with one password prime video. find your happy place. >> sometimes the lows of bipolar depression feel darkest before dawn with cat lighter. there's a chance to let in the light. cap later is proven to deliver significant relief across bipolar depression. unlike some medicines that only treat bipolar, one gets lighter traits both by the polar 1.2 depression and in clinical trials, movement disorders and weight gain, we're not common. >> call your dr. about sudden mood changes, behaviors, or suicidal thoughts and tidy depressants. we 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 life-threatening or permanent these aren't all the serious side effects capsulated can help you let in the light. ask your dr. about kept lighter, find savings and support at kept blida.com is being a young man will be cowboy or gates in a gas is alice down i've got back to my room aren't being horses. when i see all of us on his ranch i see how far our legacy can go. >> i know what it's like to perform through pain. if you're like me, one of the millions suffering from pain an caused by migraine nortech odi team may help. it's the only medication that can treat a migraine when it strikes and prevent my brain attacks. treat and prevent bent all-in-one. >> don't take if allergic to nortech allergic reactions can occur even days after using most common side effects were nausea, indigestion, and stomach pain. is it possible to count on my internet like my customers count on me? it is with comcast business. keeping you up and running with our 99.9% network reliability. and security that helps outsmart threats to your data. moaire dida twoo? - your data, too. there's even round-the-clock customer support. so you can be there for your customers. with comcast business, reliability isn't just possible. it's happening. get started for $49 a month. plus, ask how to get up to a $800 prepaid card with a qualifying internet package. don't wait, call and switch today! i can tell my mom i'm safe >> bring your family into the financial future. >> i'm arlette saenz at the white house this is cnn. >> moments ago, liz cheney tweeted about the supreme court's decision to hear the former president's claims of immunity. the former republican congresswoman and vice chair of the january 6 committee said, quote, delaying the january 6 trials suppresses critical evidence that americans deserve to hear. donald trump attempted to overturn an election and seize power. our justice system must be able to bring him to trial before the next elections. scotus should decide this case promptly reaction now from two democratic members of congress who played key roles during the impeachment. the impeachment of the former president congressman dan goldman and jamie raskin. congressman raskin, firstly, your reaction since the supreme court taking this up and the timing of what this actually means >> well, i reacted very similarly to my friend liz cheney. >> the >> people have a right to know what happened. and i think the supreme court, which is lopsided with gerrymandered right-wing appointments is really slowing things down here. the dc circuit court opinion was perfectly clear and totally compelling in saying that there was no basis at all to donald trump's fraudulent claim that a president is absolutely immune to a criminal criminal prosecution for criminal acts undertaken allegedly in pursuit of his office unless he's first impeached and convicted in the senate, which of course has never happened in american history. and so that is the claim of an entitlement to roi to be a king, to be a dictator. and so it's very dangerous. i hope that the supreme court now having taken up the case, will follow the unanimous bipartisan ruling coming out of the dc circuit and we'll find that there is no such immunity built in the constitution on the contrary, it's totally antithetical to the idea that nobody is above the law and the president's job is to take care that laws are faithfully executed, not to violate the laws by doing things like assassinating his political opponents, which his lawyers hypothesized, he could do, but comes from goldman, i mean, even if they do rule that way, as it seems they very well might doesn't this isn't this just a clear victory for the former president and his attempts to delay and delay and delay >> well, it certainly will delay some, but i'm not in the camp that believes this will necessarily delay the trial until after the election. this opinion will come down by the end of june and the district court judge has indicated that she will be ready to move very quickly. there could be a trial ended july, august that would be before the election my concern though, is similar to what professor tribe set, which is the way that they reformulated and refashion the question presented, takes it away from the specific facts of this case. and broadens the question to a question of law. and if they decide that they are going to save for example, that know a president is not absolutely immune from official acts. they could send it back down to the district court or the court of appeals to say, you need to make a finding as to whether or not this is an official act that he did because the court said to this point, tried to avoid that question and just say, of course, he doesn't have immunity. but the way the supreme court has teed it up may actually cause there to be further litigation, which of course would push it well past the november election congressman raskin, do you think that's a very real possibility as well >> yeah. i mean, the supreme court could take it in several different directions here >> i >> mean, it could do just what the dc circuit said, which is that the claim of immunity is ludicrous. and totally hopefully opposite our constitutional design or it could say, well, in certain cases, you might have it in other cases you wouldn't they might say it's clearly not available in pursuance of a criminal design. they might be seeking further fact-finding on those questions. and then further rulings by the dc circuit, which of course would slow the whole thing down. so the best scenario would be one simply saying what the dc circuit said, which is president trump is now citizen trump and you might have some temporary civil immunity for being dragged into court on particular things to accommodate your schedule as president. but once you're out, you don't have immunity for actual criminal conduct that took place while you were in office, totally outside the scope of your duty. but look, we saw the supreme court act quickly in bush versus gore when they want to move, they can move and they can make things happen in a matter of days. and so i would like to see some bush v gore style speed here to get to their ruling so we can actually see that justice go forth but i mean, there's certainly on the court don't necessarily i mean, clarence thomas's wife was involved in the so-called stop the steal rallies well, there is that problem and we've seen this court follow trump's >> bidding in dismantling roe versus wade and a half century of privacy jurisprudence in order to dismantle abortion rights obviously we can't put all of our hopes in the supreme court. the people need to be engaged in aroused at this point to demand that there'll be justice, but also to be organizing or the election. everybody needs to be vigilant. congressman goldman, >> do you think the justice department dropped the ball and not pursuing this case sooner? >> i think they should have started investigating the trump and his associates for the charge of conspiring to overturn the election before they did, they focused initially on the actual rioters who were violent and potential continuing dangerous. part of it may have been resourced issues, but i was one of the early ones calling for them to start that investigation long before they did and i will say that is part of the problem here because yes, the supreme court could have an sure. good move faster i don't quite understand why they waited so long, even just to rule to set this schedule professor tribe pointed out they could have taken it directly in december, but even if they weren't going to do that, they waited several weeks but it wouldn't be in this situation if the department of justice had moved quicker to investigate this case, congressman goldman, congressman raskin, thank you very much. appreciate it coming up next, the former president tries to play or to the deal on his $450 million fraud judgment. and what a judge set to that they one to leave works all day i can keep working just one allele, 12 hours of uninterrupted pain relief to leave. who do you take it for and for fast topical child leave x over 1 million people have put super beats by human blood pressure support supplements to the test and the numbers tell the story. we have over 70,000 five-star ratings and reviews were trusted by over 120 pro and college sports teams. we're america's number one selling beat brand. the only number one dr. pharmacist and cardiologist recommended the brand for heart health support. see why we've won the hearts of people across america? erica, i get a free month supply on all bundles at super beats.com was bad. dad holding you back only, way ambitions all in one. low fixed rates, barr left 100 k, no fees required so phi get your money rights >> guys got hair loss >> i know what you're thinking. should i shaved my head? >> coleman over, wear a hat. >> just stop this isn't 1970. keep your hair and your competence because bosley america's number one hair restoration experts can give you your real hair back permanently, check them out because they're giving away an absolutely free him mason kit and a free gift cards to everyone who's this qr code and to get you started on the path to a fuller looking at a pair, bosley will also send you for free a bottle of revived plus hair densifying fall. >> do >> you don't have to look like your dad because this isn't your dad's hair loss treatments. people all over the country trust possibly because they use the latest technology to give you your real hair back. and boss luis, permanent solution because even protected by the bosley guarantee, for a free information kit, a gift guard for $250 off, and a free revived wass hair densifying foam scan. the qr code don't wait, scan the code now and ask about the bosley guarantee. >> when enamel is gone, you cannot get it back, but you can repair it with pro nammo, repair, it penetrates deep into the to to actively repair acid weakened enamel. i recommend for namma repair with new pronoun will repair mouthwash. you can enhance that repair beyond brushing. they were great together. >> so would you yeah. >> to nashville hot tenders and three mandarin orange tenders. >> what about you? >> three classic >> tenders for big butterfly srand for of a kind. i went say closed, captioning brought to you by rula law. i kind of brands up to 70% off retail at rula law.com, at rubella >> you never faithful sees the deals on top before they're gone. today >> before the supreme court agreed to take up his presidential immunity claim. the big story was something rather remarkable. donald john trump essentially saying, i don't have the cash, i've claimed to have suggesting and in new york appeals court filing, he doesn't have the cash to pay his $454 million civil fraud judgment and can't get anyone to lend him the full amount offering instead, to put up $100 million bond and warning what would happen if he has to pay more, quoting now from his filing quote, in the absence of a stay on the terms here in outlined properties would likely need to be sold to raise capital under exigence circumstances, exigent circumstances. in other words, or a fire sale, the appeals judge quickly said no deal to any delay in collecting the full amount did put another part of the judgment, though on hold. that was the provision barring trump from dealing with new york banks in any case, it is a big come down certainly for the man who never refused to chance, including under oath, to say how much money he had believed that we have substantially in excess of 400 million cash, which is a lot for a developer. now, here's the goodness. >> i'm very rich. i started off with $1,000,000 loan. i built a net worth of over 10 billion. i would say that i'm worth more within $5 billion. >> i'm very rich. >> hey, i'm rich. the >> money you're talking about is a lot, but it's peanuts for me. >> i have a lot of money. i have a lot of money. i have many, many companies, hundreds and hundreds of transactions and many, many, many deals. >> lot of >> cash and very little debt, great assets, low debt, great cash. fortunately, i'm very rich, diverse has said that will would, if i ever sold them, don't want to sell any of them but if i ever sold above ever put some of these things up for sale, i get numbers that we're were staggering on jeff toobin, his vaccine is kara scannell joins us along with investigative journalist trump, biographer and syracuse university law lecture, david cay johnston. secure. can you just walk us through what this means for the former president? >> he has come up with the money now that's what this judge decided. he tried to get it lower to $100 that was an accepted basically it's two options. he can either post cash of 454 million or he can try to get a bond, but his lawyer said that to get a bond, he'll actually have to raise $550 million or more because the ban people, they want 120% of the judgment and also they want caches. the judgment, not property. so he's going to have to get at this money some way or another, and that's why it's the importance of that band being lifted on getting alone. >> so even if it was to get a bond, he would have to sell stuff to get that money for the bond. >> or because the judge lifted this ban on going to a bank, he can try to get alone off of some of the collaterally has some properties tried to get money off of that but that's going to come with its own challenges too, because major banks have not done business with him for decades, deutsche bank, which was his big go-to lender stopped doing business with him after january 6. so he's going to have to now look for a lot of bag. >> he go to saudi arabia and as for money, i mean, he could there's no restriction on that and that is a big question because as the front runner for the republican party to take money from a foreign >> government would be something. but this is the conundrum here. jeff, i mean, this is a blow night and >> and the interest keeps going $100,000 a day. this number is going up plus he has the $80 million judgment against him from e. jean carroll that he's got to go through the same process with and he has even started there. i mean, he he he raised $5 million for the initial image judgment, but the big damage in the punitive damages, he hasn't even said how he's going to raise that money. i think if he doesn't raise the money, it means that both e jean carroll and the state of new york can go to barbara jones, who was the person running the company but it and say, you got to start selling stuff because this judgment is in effect, so >> the super david, let me bring you and here. the supervisor that they put in that the judge put it on this that jeff just mentioned, she could actually just mandate sales of things sure. >> yes, absolutely once the time period has run, and if trump does not come up with the money and you look at the two judgments and the overage that's going to be wanted. you're looking at about $600 million maybe more than $600 million. now, of course, if donald really was worth to 10 billion, he claims this wouldn't be a problem, would be an annoyance. instead, it's a crisis because he's not worth anywhere near that and you're sure. i mean, how much do you know how much property he has and how much is actually worth? i mean, i obviously a lot of the values he has given have been inflated according to the judge. >> well, we know all we know all the properties that he owns, those have all been disclosed in various ways, including when he was president, his financial disclosure your we know that depths on many of these buildings and there are some things he might be able to arrange a deal to get out if for example, he gets tremendous cash flow from a deal with vornado realty trust which owns what was the bank of america headquarters in san francisco, and a very big building in manhattan he's a minority partner, i think 30% ownership. he might be able to take that cash. but anybody who loans the money to donald runs the risk that when he loses his appeal as he's likely to do then he's going to fight collection with them because that's how he does business. >> and what are they the next day? what's the timeline in this case? >> so he's got less than 30 days. so put this money out, but he does get another shot at the appeals court. this was one judge today. he will be able to make the same argument to a panel of judges. they set a briefing schedule very quickly. all briefs will be due at the middle of next month. we're told a decision expected at the end of march, that is when this payment is going to come do so they're running in parallel, but he's really racing the clock here and he's going to have to move quickly to get them this money together >> and what options jeff, if letitia, james does, letitia james have if he doesn't good to go to barbara jones, who is the person in charge and say, look, the company owes this money. this is a debt like any other debt and we are collecting and it's up to you, barbara jones, who is effectively running the company now to come up with this money, if you have to sell buildings, cell buildings have to borrow money, borrow money. but we the state of new york is one. this money owed this money, and we are former mob prosecutor. she >> just she was the head of the organized crime. >> it's going >> to be the weirdest situation for her to be overseeing i mean, does she go into the office every day when dani juniors there and eric trump and everybody's having coffee. i mean, i think they spent most of their time in florida now, the trump family, they're not they're not new york too much, but the one of the things he appeals court did is they basically said to the trump family will give you this 30 days to put this together and then you're thrown out because that is also part of the ruling in the civil case. >> there's going to have toobin thanks so much. david cay johnston as well, coming up next. well, the white house us physician is saying and not saying about president biden's health after his annual physical today as he seeks reelection at age 81, grew up tourist >> tourists that turn into science. tourists, taking photos that are analyzed by ai so researchers can help life underwater >> clerics >> have you heard sling tv offers the news you love for last wait, you look and sound just like me. actually, i am you. because on the same news programs on sling for less, you mean you're me but for less money. a lot less. i'm all your favorite news programs and more on sling starting at just $40 a month. everything great about me, but for less money, which makes me greater than you think it's the same news for less, starting at $40 a month >> get help reaching your goals with jpmorgan wealth plan, the digital money coach in the chase mobile app use it to set and track your goals. >> big >> and small, and see how changes you make today. could help put them within reach. from your first big move to retiring poolside. and the other goals along the way wealth plan can help you get there jake p. morgan, wealth management >> start your day with nature me. >> the number >> one pharmacist recommended vitamin supplement brand, >> stay to the takeover, $39 off our original price on the complete set of stack master cookware it's our best deal ever. don't ms it has your old set of pans lost their slick. does everything good? bag dod, burden, and stick, you know, you need to do that. but the prices are so high, it's obscene, real good, ready to stack up as savings with stack master by granite stone. it's a kitchen full well, the most durable ultra non-stick cookware at the most affordable price anywhere. plus it stacks to fit all in one place. it takes up a fraction of this space. now, making your family five-star was aimed, that's delicious and leave no oil or butter needed snack master cookware. it is constructed from a heart aluminum plate and coded three times with our dura hubble ultra non-stick granite stone finish. their oven rated up to 500 degrees and come with vented tempered glass lids to prevent boil over plus all stack master cookware here's 100% metal utensil and dishwasher safe. look, you'd expect to pay over $400 for a professional quality cookware said, but during this special tv introduction can, you can get the complete stack master ten? pete said, not for 400, 300, or even $200, but for the factory direct price of just five, easy payments have 39, 99, but wait, it gets even better. we're going to slash one payment >> you get it. oh, we're just for easy payments of 39, 99 massacre where it comes with a ten year warranty, but watch out. we're still slashing for everyone who calls. it goes online to order today, granite stone is slashing another payment that's right. not five, not four, but three easy payments of 39, 99, it gets you the complete set of stack master cookware. that's a savings of over $39 at the best deal ever and just what you thought we were done will ship your entire order that's right. free shipping ordered. now, do you order call 1800 to 841873? that's 1800 to 841873 or order online. and my stack master.com. >> welcome to stormy heights. where the windows are always paella apellis fiberglass is the strongest material for windows and patio doors. the fiberglass spraying has even scratch and dent resistant. hello, windows tested for extremes, designed for your home >> a forced to be recommended. >> know that you say client. do your business bank account with quickbooks money now earns 5% apy 5% apy. >> that's new. >> yep, that's how you business differently >> or breaking news, president biden is quote, a healthy, active, robust, 81 year-old male who remains fit to successfully execute the duties of the presidency that is. just one line from a six page summary written by the white house physician after the president had his annual physical today. short time later, the nation's oldest sitting president joked with reporters at his doctors, think he looks too young his health assessment comes at obviously a critical time with him facing questions about whether he's physically and mentally capable of serving another four years in the white house. he did not go so undergo a cognitive test today because the white house said that doctors didn't find that necessary. that's obviously raising questions joining us. is dr. sanjay gupta our chief medical correspondent, also cnn's political analyst, kate bedingfield, former biden white house communications director sanjay biden's dr. says he continues to be quote, fit for duty unquote what else does this? the president's health summary reveal or not? >> well, you know, it's it's pretty similar to what we saw last year. there wasn't a lot of changes during the interval. the interval history as they call it the biggest thing compared to last year was that he now uses a c cpap machine for sleep apnea. heard of this, it's basically gives you continuous pressure. so you can sleep at night. much of the other things that you may see on the screen, there are things that we've known about for some time it takes a statin medication for cholesterol. you take a blood thinner because he has atrial fibrillation. one of the biggest things i think that they focused a lot on in this six page summary was his his gait, his walking in the stiffness of his walking there's about 20 specialists involved in his physical exam today. many of them around this issue of his gaits. so neurologists, radiologist's work the predicts physical therapists, and what they concluded and they wrote about this, they said, first of all, we rule out things like a stroke or ms or parkinson's disease. this is most likely due to arthritis of the spine pretty significant arthritis the spine, but not bad enough where they think it warrants any kind of treatment right now. they say it's about the same as it was last year but it's it's obviously very noticeable, which is why think they spent so much time on it. but that was where a lot of the attention was focused as you point out, anderson, there was no cognitive test that was performed. >> so the president did see a neurologist today, but it's sunday said there was no cognitive test. here's what karine, jean-pierre, the press secretary, said about that today. >> the president's dr. he says, if you look at what this president, the president who is also the commander achieve, he passes a cognitive test every day every day as he moves from one topic to another topic understanding the granular level of these topics. >> so if the president took a cognitive test and did well as the white house is color, you're suggesting he would assume that would help dispel the narrative that he's not up to the job, whereas not taking the test doesn't fuel that narrative >> but remember a cognitive test is usually only administered when a dr. believes there's reason for it. i mean, maybe sanjay can speak to this a little bit, but if if they were to have the president take the cognitive test and critics could say, well, why, why? what was the reason? why did the doctors thinking needed to take a couple cognitive tests? so, you know, it's a little bit of a catch 22 there. i think what they were doing is trying to follow the medical guidelines and also be incredibly transparent. i mean, they put out as sanjay was just saying they've put out this report every year. they're very detailed in the way they walk through any issues the president has i think by sticking to the medical guidelines, sticking to the recommendation, not voluntarily taking the cognitive test you know, they're showing in effect that he doesn't need it sanjay. i mean, >> plenty of people go to their doctors though and say, you know what, i'm i i'm mixing up words here or there or i'm noticing, i'm searching for words like i was just searching for words right now as i was talking to you you know, should i take a test or something how would a neurologist decide? if a patient needs a cognitive test >> yeah. no, it's a really good question and it's not a just a bright line to say, okay, now you need a cognitive test yes. now you don't i mean, despite how long this visit was, a few hours, it's still a relatively short time. it is typically what is the patient's saying? what is the family saying as well? have there been any issues of concern and after that, i think the bar is pretty low because the type of tests we're talking about and i don't know if we have an image do this. you may remember this anderson, the montreal cognitive assessment. this is the one that president trump to former president trump took a few years ago. and if it's up on the screen, but you can see what it's like, numbers and letters connecting them at drawing a three-dimensional cube memory test, drawing a clock it takes about 15 minutes or so to do it's pretty simple. and it's a screening test. it's not diagnostic, but screening in the sense that okay. there's something here. let's explore this a little bit further. not saying someone has dementia or anything like that, but just more of an indication that we should explore this further you know, it's not an absolute that he doesn't need it. this guy does need it to give you some context. anderson, about 16% of seniors when they go on for a physical exam, they do get a cognitive tests like this. so the most, most people don't, but not an insignificant percentage of people do i take your point about sticking to the medical advice, not taking a cognitive test, but certainly the assumption mentioned family concern. i mean, there's a lot of country concern poll after poll shows people are concerned about his age i guess the question would be, why not meet that head on and take a test the eye, it seems like the only answer is if you don't do well, then obviously then that's a big issue. >> i mean, i think people see him every day. i mean, they see him out there. yes. does he confuse word sometimes of course he does. so do i you were just saying you did as well. >> but you know, there's no >> reason in the execution of his day-to-day responsibilities as president, there's nothing that any of the people around him, including by the way, the dr. who was with him, free whatley, i mean, obviously he went today for the full battery of tests at walter reed, but there's a medical staff that's with him at the white house they have not recommended that he needs this. so, you i think just if you think about the politics of it, the news cycle of it. i mean, think back to when trump took the cognitive test and talked about man, person, woman camera the entirety of the media was consumed by that for days and days on end. that's not something the biden team is interested in doing. >> here you're >> feeding the beast by administering, administering a cognitive test that the president does not need. >> kate bedingfield, sanjay gupta, thanks so much coming out, but cnn exclusive involving the fani willis misconduct hearing hundreds of newly obtained emails that for the first time show just how deeply involved a defense witness was in the efforts to disqualify her. and what happened when he actually testified under oath. that's it. >> good morning we're building a better postal service. all parts working in sync to move your business forward. for more value, more of a liability, and more on-time deliveries. the united states postal service built for how you business. >> when you buy or sell your car, exactly how you want with car gurus, you might begin to wonder what if you could do things your way all the time some dreams do come true. >> get your car, your way, get it with gurus oh crap, that's a really good gift. >> now, we gotta get france something. >> we could use. these new gift mode. >> yes. >> what are the french like? >> anyone, cheese >> they like cheese >> brilliant done let's due to former. we don't would give new >> we are a young republican and we are ready to grow. >> how do i look >> perfect? >> good boy. >> i love the fact for smells, smells like jobs some pride. >> let me do my work and be grateful >> okay. >> sorry >> streaming exclusively on max look in. good guys >> situations are better with a credit gods on your side for awards once available to the few are now that's the votes of the many earn points for travel with credit one bank. and liz large >> mokri >> thank you. >> today >> see idp disrupts the idp derails. >> let's be honest, sucks but living to see idp doesn't have to. >> when you sign up at shining through cid p.com, you'll find inspiration and real patients stories, helpful tips, reliable information, and more the cid peak can be tough. >> but finding hope just got a little easier >> sign up >> i'm lauren fox on capitol hill and this is cnn for messi or trial involving the former president is playing out in atlanta a day after a key witness for the defense waffled on the stand, frustrating their efforts to prove claims of misconduct on the part of the georgia da fani willis. we have a cnn exclusive tonight, hundreds of newly obtained and text messages which shed light on that waffling witness. nick valencia has more >> did you lie to ms merchant when you told her facts about mr. wade and ms willis has relationship cnn has obtained over 400 text messages that show this man terrence bradley, was more deep lee involved than previously known in advising the effort to disqualify fulton county district attorney, fani willis. >> so as as an attorney yourself you are testifying here under oath that you had no idea what ms merchant was going to do with all the details that you are giving her about wade and willis's relationship? >> so at the time, no, i did not. earlier this week on the witness, stan bradley, nathan wade's divorce attorney repeatedly said he could not recall details about willis and nathan wade's relationship, but in text messages obtained by cnn just days before the allegations of a conflict of interest were initially filed in court. bradley told ashleigh merchant, the defense attorney for trump's co-defendant, that wade and willis were absolutely interrelationship before she hired him. is this accurate merchant rights upon information and belief, willis and wade met while both were serving as magistrate judges and began a romantic relationship at that time >> no >> municipal court bradley response, correcting her in another tax from january 7, 2024, bradley provides merchant with names of several people who he believed had firsthand knowledge of when willis and wade's romance began subpoena them all. bradley says in the text referring to a list of names that included other prosecutors in the da's office, members of willis's security detail and others close to her speculated on some things. >> in contrast, on the stand tuesday, he seemed uncomfortable with a line of questioning for merchant. >> i do not recall any dates of when the of when the relationship started. i'm telling you i did not recall any specific date at this time. i don't recall at this time. i am telling you you that i do not have the date in the tax which spanned months bradley assist merchant from behind the scenes while pushing to remain anonymous. i really appreciate you keeping me out. he says in a text after reviewing a draft of merchants original motion to disqualify willis but i think you need to add me in the footnote