receives also tie attorney general garland under oath, facing republican allegations of weaponizing the justice system of those inflammatory claims stand up against the actual facts. and as the president takes executive action on god documented migrants. a story you'll only see here how one man has taken the issue into his own hands. what he encounters in his knights on the border good evening. >> thanks for joining us. begin with breaking news request late today from the former president's legal team to lift the gag order. now that a jury has found him guilty on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to keep word of its hush money payment to stormy daniels from reaching voters in the 2016 election? as you know, gag order or not, he's already said plenty about the judge. the judge's daughter, and witnesses in the case. now his lawyers are seeking free rein. cnn's kara canal is here with the tails also join his best-selling author and former federal prosecutors, jeffrey thuban, and retired new york judge joel kahn visor, longtime friend of the trial judge in the case. so kara, what is the trump team want? >> so trump's team is saying now that the trial is over and the gag order that was put in place to protect the witnesses, the jury, from trump's comments. now that it's over there saying that the judge should lift this gag order, so they write in the letter to the judge now that the trial is concluded, the concerns articulated by the government and the court do not justified continued restrictions on the first amendment rights of president trump, who remains the leading candidate in the 2024 presidential election. and the american people and they go on to say that they think that there's even a stronger argument now to remove it because president joe biden has made comments on the verdict and has stormy daniels and michael cohen to the key witnesses. so the courts spokesman for the judge just says the order speaks for itself. the da's office has declined to comment i mean, either way, trump has not prohibited from talking about the trial, talking about the verdict is just he's prohibited from speaking about these witnesses and the jury. and the question will be, expect the d office will file a response and then ultimately see what the judge does. >> geoff amuses a reasonable request. >> i think it is a reasonable quest when it comes to the witnesses. the idea behind a gag order about witnesses is that you don't want to affect their testimony in any way. they are they have testified the testimony is over. also, you have the main key witnesses in this case michael cohen, stormy daniels, david pecker, hope hicks, they're all public figures with access to the press themselves several of them have already commented, i think it's a little different with the jury. i think judges are very protective of jurors, even after they have served, especially is such an inflammatory situation. here and we're their identities have largely been kept secret. i wouldn't be surprised if the judge kept the restrictions on the jury and effect, but witnesses, i do think trump has a good point, judge. >> you agree with it? >> i do. i agree that it is not entirely a crazy request, but it would not be crazy for him to continue the gag order either. let's remember, the defendant is convicted with the case has not wrapped up. that defendant is yet to be sentenced, and a judgment of conviction, therefore, has not yet been entered. so i think it'd be well within his rights to do it, but i agree completely that the judge that any judge we'd much more concerned about jurors then witnesses, particularly public witnesses, who have been speaking out, would that geoff would that from a legal standpoint and even exist after whatever the sentencing is. i mean, if if can a judge have a permanent gag order protecting witnesses for no. >> no. i mean, he his jurisdiction over this case continues as long as the case is in effect af is pending this case is obviously going to be appealed. >> it would then be up to the court of appeals to decide if they want to issue a gag order. frankly, i've never even heard maybe you have. i've never heard of a court of a appeals issuing a gag order. so i think this only applies until the sentencing, which is now june, july 11, which is just a little more than a month away. >> so care when will this be ruled on it? >> i mean expectation is that the da's team will respond probably pretty quickly and then i would think that the judge would make a decision. i mean, he he has he has complete control of this calendar, so he could decide to just not rule on it until the sentencing or he could decide to do it more quickly. there's not really an immediacy to this request is not an emergency request of any kind in the sentencing is about six weeks away. so it's really up to the judge to decide when he's going to do that. and if he's going to wait until the end of the proceedings, judges, in terms of the width sentencing if the former approval is to violate the current gag order, how much would that play into and his previous violations, how much would that play into sentencing about possible prison time or not? >> i think that's an excellent question and i say that because when it comes to sentencing, the world is the judge's oyster and can consider anything when you're when you're in a courtroom, when you're making rulings and they're coming fast and furious on evidentiary issues. it's one thing. there are rules to follow. there are really not a lot of rules in terms of sentencing. and the judge can and should look at everything, including what the defendant has said, what remorse, if any, if he's attacking witnesses the judge should consider that i certainly would remember. >> it's he was found in contempt. i mean, that is a separate violation. and what was i think it was 11. was 11 different 1010 different findings of contempt that is entirely relevant to the decision on sentencing, doesn't mean he's going to get jail time, but it certainly pushes jail time into a more likely area, given a very serious thing, that contempt of court is if tube and thanks, judge. can visor kara scannell. thanks so much. now, keep it a monocyte studying contrast in one hearing at the capitol today, fbi director christopher wray warned of a series of domestic threats facing the country when i look back over my career in law enforcement, i would be hard-pressed to think of a time when so many different threats to our public safety and national security were so elevated all at the same time. >> but that is the case. as i sit here today those threats he told a senate panel include the potential for coordinated attack like the march ices k masker at a russian concert hall last march. computer ransomware attacks and the fentanyl epidemic that was one hearing and scary though the specifics where everything else about it was fairly typical by contrast, over on the house, sayyed it was anything. but as republican members of the house judiciary committee grilled director raise boss, attorney general merrick garland in their battle against what they say is a weaponized justice system targeting the former president mr. attorney general. >> there's no blinking. >> the fact that for the first time in american history we do have a presidential administration is working to put its opponent in jail well, as many others have reported, there's no evidence the justice department fbi investigator are several federal grand juries and judges are doing anything but their jobs and no evidence that any federal officials influenced new york authorities. >> the judge or the 12 jurors who convicted the former president but that is not stopping the allegations is seen as manu raju found out today, do you swear or affirm under penalty of per attorney general merrick garland facing off with his loudest critics on capitol hill. i will not be intimidated and the justice department will not be intimidated and calling out gop attacks that his department was behind the new york hush money case that may donald trump first ever x president to become a convicted felon. >> that conspiracy theory is an attack on the judicial process itself. >> republicans firing back, we'll the department of justice provides to the committee all documents, all correspondence between the department and alvin bragg's office and fani willis also office and letitia james, his office. >> the offices you referring to our independent offices of state. >> i get that. i get that day. the question is, why not? you we will provide all of your documents in correspondence. that's the question. it's i don't need a history lesson well i'm going to say again, we do not control those offices. >> they make their request indicate with them not whether you control do you communicate with them and we provide those can make a request. we will refer it to our office of legislative, but here's the thing that you come in here and you lodge this attack, that it's a conspiracy heresy theory, that there is coordinated lawfare against trump. >> and then when we say fine, just give us the documents, give us the correspondence. and then if it's a conspiracy theory that will be evidenced democrats said republicans were playing for an audience of one. there were about to nominate a convicted felon and they don't know how to cope with that the gop taking aim at garland for appointing special counsel, jack smith, who is leading the prosecution against trump in two federal indictments. >> your first choice? >> i'm not gonna go into the question. >> did you know him before you picked him? i did not. did he ask for the job this is not a job. >> i don't think anybody asks for. that's not that sorry. but that's not the question i asked you. i said did jack smith asieh asked me? >> for the job? no. >> garland today refusing to comply with the house subpoena for audio of special counsel robert hur's interview with president joe biden over his handling of classified documents in that 388 page report, hurd declined to prosecute biden citing in part how a jury would view him as a sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory, releasing the audio would show cooperation with the department in future investigations. >> republicans accusing garland of protecting biden as they threatened he attorney general with contempt of congress the big as doj has determined the president is not mentally fit to defend himself and stand trial for his crime. but former president trump is, i say again, that's an inaccurate description of mr. hers a report undercutting the gop's criticism is the fact that two sitting democratic congressman and the president's own son, hunter, are facing three separate criminal indictments. so you've prosecuted democrats as we speak, a hunter biden who is a son of the president, is under trial in delaware. you haven't weaponized the justice department in terms of hiding and protecting democrats. menendez cuellar hunter biden, the justice department follows the facts and the law now, merrick garland also faced questions from three gop hardliner today about the treatment of january 6, prisoners 3d he's three congressman roy biggs, a massive right in a letter to garland in part what they say is, in addition, other investigations have pointed to the fbi's possible involvement in facilitating the events of january 6, they cite as evidenced in this letter, a new york post columnist peas from last year about this topic. >> now, it is important to point out, anderson that the fbi director christopher wray, has repeatedly testified, but the fbi had absolutely no involvement in the attack on january 6, the justice department itself, has prosecuted hundreds of people, many of whom pleaded guilty, admitted they are wrong, and some of them also, of course, anderson said they came to the capital because thought they were following trump's orders, not erasure. mano. thank you. california democratic congressman, i'm ashamed for you saw briefly amount as report serves on the judiciary committee as a former member of the select committee on january 6, he's more than qualified to speak to allegations about the fbi's role on that day. i mean, i guess i shouldn't be surprised but it is i mean, it's still just strikes me as bizarre that so many house republicans keep pushing a debunk claim that the fbi played a role in facilitating the events in january 6, it is crazy and they know better and they continue to push all of these conspiracy theories heard today. as jim jordan, matt gaetz, and others tried to suggest that the justice department or the president was behind the manhattan da's prosecution. they understand how the court system works. they know so that the federal system is completely separate and distinct from a local prosecutor's office like that. i'm manhattan you know, matt gaetz for his own part as all too much experience in the criminal justice system, being the subject of sex trafficking case so they understand how the system works, but they wish to mislead the public. they want to somehow obscure the fact that they're about to be nominee is now a convicted felon and they're willing to tear down the justice system and do what ever is necessary in the service of that deeply flawed human being. you said that in the hearing that's what you think is at the heart of this, that they're freetown essentially over trump's conviction and are trying to figure out how to deal with it. absolutely. and, not just in committee, but so many of them in fact when they were holding merrick garland in contempt, a couple of weeks ago, they had many members absent, some of which were absent because they weren't manhattan standing outside the courthouse, essentially paying field t once again, to donald trump they hope to avert a conviction now that there are multiple, multiple convictions, they're just tearing everything down and doing such enormous damage you'll one of the questions i didn't have a chance to ask merrick garland today is what's the effect in courthouses around the country? undoubtedly. and i've heard this from prosecutors. you have defendants making the trumpian argument that they're prosecutions r0, which aren't there a hoax there, a sham attacking the fbi and the same language that donald trump, it is enabled on the committee are using and this is really undermining the rule of law everywhere the level of dysfunction in these hearings. >> i mean, we've seen look for for a long time. we've seen in hearings like this politicians on all sides of the aisle, grandstanding, playing for cameras and stuff like that. but just in your experience, how does it compare now to what you have seen or we've all seen in the past well, it is just a whole another order of magnitude of deterioration you know, in the past, you would have kind of a one-off member here. are there who said stuff that was just plain crazy? now, it is just routine and there is this, i think pernicious competition among members of the gop, both as to who can essentially kiss donald trump's brass ring more demonstrably than the other or just say the most extreme things, it's become a and it w', it won't continue this way indefinitely for good, which i hope will be a november, i think the temperature comes down but nevertheless, we're seeing what people are really made of congressman schiff i appreciate your time. >> thank you so much. more prospective now from john miller or chief law enforcement intelligence analyst, veteran of the fbi in new york police department that how i mean, is there a real-world threat based on these kind of conspiracy theories? does it actually, is it actually dangerous well, it is because what we saw today and not the first time i understand. >> i think as congressman pointed out, is the difference between acute and non conspiracy chat room with the crazy conspiracy theories that have been spawned. a congressional hearing has narrowed now to almost nil. why is that concerning? if you're the justice department, if you're the fbi there are people out there because this is the lai off pleaded just becomes some kind of truth. there are people out there that these investigators will be interviewing, will be seeing, will be investigating where they expect that trust and confidence in the fbi and the justice department. and this foments, these doubts, these are sworn oath taking career civil servants. i worked in the fbi. i dealt with the department of justice every day. these are people who as i did, worked for republicans, worked for democrats. and will work for republicans and democrats today. and to the fbi academy, a sheriff gave me an expression a long time ago and he said, if you're going to go wrestle with a pig, you're both going to get mud on you. the difference is the pig likes it when these people go before congress and they take that oath to tell the truth, the people asking these questions they don't have to have the truth. the question is the stunt do do you talk to people in the doj, the fbi? >> i'm sure. all the time. does this have an impact on morale oh, it does. >> and you know why they know that. what's being said isn't true? they know that the hearing is essentially rigged for this kind of showmanship but they also know that when they get out of the car to walk up there walkway, their neighbors are looking at them and wondering like, is that the justice department that joe works at is that the fbi that bill serves in and it affects morale? especially because they take this so seriously if you, if you listen to merrick garland's last words in his statement, he said, i will not be intimidated and the justice department will not be intimidated. we will continue to do our job free of political influence or fear and that is what they're counting on its, it's you think works. i mean, do you think they are intimidated well, i think that it has an effect when you're working on a case and they tell you, you follow the facts, the case is the boss. >> don't worry about politics when you, when you see your political masters, your elected officials accusing the fbi of being behind january 6, i'm singling out individual agents and prosecutors and saying they are behind conspiracies by naming them, by saying we're going to defund the fbi. we're going to defund jack smith's investigation. it can't not have some effect. what they count on is their leadership to protect them from political influence. and we saw even at the end of the trump administration, his own political appointees to the justice department, resigning and threatening to resign en-masse if he forced them to follow these false election interference allegations. so what merrick garland is cautious, he is measured to the point of being boring today, what we saw was he was angry and it is defending his agency and his people john miller, thanks very much. next to people taking action on the border. >> president biden, and the latest some steps he took today and a man you'll meet here tonight military veteran, who's made it his new mission to see the problems up close and document them. later day. one of evidence and the hunter biden trial, including the defendant's own words played by prosecutors describing his descent into drug addiction carney isolde, it's got an answer that's what i said. >> god-man, saada, gotten need gotten me, got juicy garden beers to credit. we know running a business takes everything you have and only a certain kind of leader has what it takes every new challenges years to solve. and there's no such thing as off >> and center a preview right away i lost this. thanks guys. >> that's a relief. >> it sure is great to know and some things coming don't panic, gift easy with etsy times, eric and i am 39-years-old. >> i've started thinking about getting botox cosmetic for the last couple of years. i just see myself on video calls all day and i really st