died in the third was wounded. all of this as wisconsin officials remain on edge. >> sandra: alexis mccracken was asserting itself alive outside of the courthouse there for the crowd has been building. all of this went down when we learned that the jury had a couple of questions when the judge front of impact in the courtroom. >> that's right. there's been a lot of action in the courtroom. the jury seats were empty and now they have been in and out of the courtroom here as they have more questions for the judge. the prosecution and the defense and the room as well. it is not surprising that these jurors might have questions. these are the instructions they were given. more than 30 pages of instructions. the jurors, a couple of things that we know they asked are that they wanted to receive the video from the night in question a few more times. the judge will be allowing them to come back in the courtroom to review those clips as well as pictures. moments ago, drudge bruce schroeder explaining the process behind some of the key decisions he has made so far in the trial saying that he is not yet had time to review the motion for mistrial. it was only filed by the defense yesterday. >> i haven't even had a chance to read the motion. i just got it yesterday. it i really think that before a role on a motion, i should let the state respond. >> it was interesting when the judge took a few minutes there to talk on the criticism that he's heard about himself on this trial because he talked about how it has been on television and as it's been live unfolding people have been going in on him and giving him some criticism there on these decisions has been making. over the trunk, one of the other things that was highly contested there in court was at the people who were shot come the three men including the two who were killed by kyle rittenhouse, could not be called victims. and he explained why. >> is it so difficult to use the term instead of prejudging what the jury is here to determine whether or not there is a victim push tonic and whether there was a crime committed? >> this man his arm with an ar-15 walkout outside of the courthouse during the jury deliberation. he was outside yesterday clashing with protesters. sheriff deputies stopping him asking to see his permit and his license to make sure everything matched up. he put his weapon back voluntarily according to deputies. back out here live in front of the courthouse in kenosha, wisconsin, kyle rittenhouse remains on trial for shooting through manning killing two during the unrest that followed the police shooting of jacob lake. the now 18-year-old could face up to life in prison. as you can see, there's been more people showing up on both sides. some of those people support kyle and others are against him here in kenosha. back to. >> sandra: live in kenosha for us as the breaking news continues, andy mccarthy joins us as the former assistant attorney and fox news could jupiter. great to see. see you. as far as the question that bruce schroeder received from the jury reviewing some of the video evidence in the case, how unusual is this and what did you make of the way that he responded saying if they want to watch it hundreds of times, that should be fine with him. >> in a trial to sandra, especially the old days when physical exhibits were mainly documents and it still photographs, you would just send them back to the jury and they could look at them or not look at them and pour over them as much as they wanted to. video is different, obviously, because there is a process that has to take place in order for them to view it. for whatever reason, they don't have them equipped in the jury room to play the videos themselves. this is substance of importance and why do they want to see this video? the other part is ministerial which is along the lines of how are they going to watch it and how may so they get to watch it? that's less important. what's really important here is that they want to get this video because they honed in on what the main factual question -- there are factual questions in this case, but this is the main one. the defense always contended that rittenhouse was fleeing. he was going away from the people who he ultimately had a confrontation with. prosecution contended on the basis of a very contested piece of evidence that they brought in at the last minute that rittenhouse was the assailant rather than the one who is being pursued in connection with the first encounter which was with the guy who got shot who's name is joseph rosenbaum. what they want to see is that confrontation so they can evaluate what the lawyers for both sides represented about that encounter. spiel what youth make up the charge from the defense that the prosecution with held higher resolution copy of that same video? the defense was provided with a video that was lower by 3.6 megabytes where's the prosecution had in its possession the higher resolution that was about 11.2 megabytes but did not let the defense know about it until after the trial was over? >> if it turns out that what the defense is saying about that is true, i think it is a huge problem in the case. what the defense is supposed to get in discovery is what the prosecution has. if they give them something that was of a poor quality, it is not just giving them something like that, if the timing of it. a lot of this in this particular drone exhibit did not come in until after the evidence was closed. a lot of times lawyers will get leeway to use what are known as demonstrative exhibits when they are making arguments to the jury the idea being a chart or something that summarizes an argument that you want to make to a jury is no different than just making the argument without the chart. my not be able to have something you could use for summation? that is to be distinguished from evidence that actually comes into trial. exhibits that are offered and received by both sides that are part of the factual record that the jury has to decide the case on. this drone video was treated by the prosecutors as if it was going to be a demonstrative exhibit that they could use in their summation, but it has had the effect of something that came into evidence that they are arguing that rittenhouse is guilty on the basis of. the defense feels like they were sandbagged because they did not get a chance during the evidence portion of the trial to attack this video which fell on them in the middle of summation which is not the way this is supposed to happen. >> sandra: if you could standby with us, we do expect that the judge will resume in the courtroom with the jury having more questions. i just want to update our viewers. originally it was two questions at the jury came back with. according to a reporter, the judge has received two more questions from the jurors. it is unclear at this point what those questions are and if they are procedural in nature, but we do not bet the first two questions are. do we view videos and private or in the courtroom and the judge entered the courtroom. do you need to know exactly exhibit number of photos? we're going to try to take viewer numbers through this. standby. >> john: let's bring in jonathan turley the law professor and law attorney. we do know that the jury wants watches video again. i know that this is speculation that i'm asking you to engage in, but do you believe that the jury wants to look at that video to answer the question of provocation or do they want to look at the proximity of joseph rosenbaum to kyle rittenhouse on the trigger was pulled? what you think? >> it could be all of the above. what's interesting about these questions is that they give an insight into where the jury is now focused. since this is now wednesday, they probably already have had a vote and maybe multiple votes. when they asked to look at evidence at this stage, you have to wonder if they may be deadlocked on one or two counts. sometimes the jokers will reach out to the judge if they are having difficulties in their summations. the first two questions are housekeeping. they want to watch the video and that's understandable. but sometimes the questions, if their own substantive points, can be an effort to break up a deadlock on the jury. sometimes it jurors will ask the judge if there is disagreement o language. they can be very insightful in terms of the parties to where the jury is heading. it is quite natural to want to look at the video evidence. when you have video evidence, it has this enormous gravitational pull. we are a visual species and that type of evidence is viewed by the jurors as it does not lie. we can see it for ourselves. that is particularly important in a case where you have had a lot of challenges over representations made by the prosecution including statements made in the opening arguments that were not borne out at trial. when you have those types of doubts, this type of evidence is even more important. >> sandra: as we watch the crowds gathering there on the steps of the courthouse, just update our viewers, as a judge has left the bench. we are told from the pool reporters that he left the bench and went back into his chambers. the attorneys are in the courtroom and are setting up monitors. i would follow up by asking you, as you have been telling us what you're taking away from the jury, where they might be in this and if they are possibly moving along quickly or does this indicate to you that perhaps this is going to take some time for them to come to a verdict? >> i've been cautioning people all day about reading too much into the long deliberations. it is true that jury decisions are often made in the first 8-10 hours even in major cases. but that's not always the case. if you take a look at paul manafort, it took four days for those jurors to convict him in a case with 16 counts. it can be a prolonged deliberation. this may just be a jury that is doing due diligence as opposed to being deadlocked. that's why these later questions are going to be interesting if they are more substantive instead of just mechanical or procedural. as for the request to see the video, we all expected that. that is something i doubt most jurors would feel comfortable ruling until they got another look at what happened. they're going to be looking at that in the courtroom. council's going to be remaining silent unless a grave error occurs and the jurors are allowed to watch as many times as they want. they're allowed to speak amongst themselves in these demonstration evidence and viewing. as andy said and quite correctly, usually they look at this in the jury room and they can discuss it as they are reviewing it. my guess is that the judge wants him to feel comfortable even though under state rules, they have to view this with the judge in the courtroom. the judge felt that was dumb and i agree with him. he said this is archaic. we have common vision to make video evidence of this client and making them come out of the room every time and assemble in the courtroom is unnecessary. he felt locked in by the rules. >> sandra: and that is what happened with the first two questions. the judge called everyone back from the courtroom, right allowed the jury's questions. he has not done that that we know and of course that could happen any moment now. we will be bringing that life to our viewers when that happens. thank you and both of those will standby with us. >> john: do not go anywhere. let's bring in republican whose first district includes the city of kenosha. i don't know if you feel comfortable as a member of congress weighing in on what we are seeing in the courtroom, but i wanted to give you the opportunity if you have thoughts. >> kenosha family centered in hard member community. the jury is going to make their decision. following the jury's decision, the people express themselves in a legal manner consistent with the first amendment. what we saw play out last summer with individuals engaging in criminal behavior. that cannot happen. the breakdown of public safety resulted in the criminal behavior we saw all across kenosha and it resulted in the tragic incident that this whole deliberation is about. it should have never occurred in the first place. if we would have established public safety in kenosha. to be when you work with local and state officials on contingency plans for if there s unrest in kenosha. what is on standby in case things do get out of hand? >> i've spoken to a lot of local officials. they currently feel comfortable that they have the resources needed to build and maintain public safety. they have over 500 national guard troops. to scale that, on the monday following the original incident, there were only 125. on tuesday when the incident played out being debated by the jury, there is only 250 national guard troops. it's possible to see that we finally got the message but we need to make sure we have adequate resources to maintain public safety in a community of kenosha and that is true across all of our communities in the united states of america. the liberal message of the phone the police and refusing to stand with the men and women of law enforcement has catastrophic consequences and kenosha felt that last summer. we can never allow that to happen again. >> john: i've heard more than a few people say that if the national guard was available on august 25th 2020 what we saw happen might not of happen. there does appear to become a congressman, some encouraging signs on the court steps. listen to what tonya mclean who is a kenosha community activist said about what people should do in the wake of a verdict here. >> we are asking everyone to stay safe. i want to reiterate, we did not come here for reasons that do not bring good to community. we do not want more of what happened last year. that solves nothing. for either side. >> john: one of the people there and it might've been hurt went on to save your out after 7:00 at night after a verdict is rendered, you are not with kenosha. the posture that folks have taken her on the court steps, it does not give you reason to be optimistic? >> i'm going to remain optimistic, but what's so essential is that we allow first amendment rights but we draw a fine line between first amendment behavior. officials looked the other way as criminal behavior was playing out in the street and it went from bad to worse. i want to go back to an earlier point you made. as you noted correctly that if a sufficient resources were in kenosha, all of it could've been avoided in the first place. it's important to remember that on that tuesday morning, i was calling for national and federal resources to the immunity of kenosha. the president of the united states called our governor and offered those resources. our governor turned that offer down. dad went to worse and it wasn't until after the incident is being debated that was accepted. public safety was reestablished. that lesson needs to be reminded everyone watching this. providing essential resources is absolutely critical to maintain public safety. >> john: based on the preparations you've outlined to us, it looks a people did get the message. thank you for being with us and we appreciate your thoughts today. >> sandra: house lawmakers debating ahead of a vote on resolution to censure republican congressman paul gosar. it would strip the arizona lawmaker of his committee assignment. it all comes and response to him tweeting and edited video showing him killing democratic congressman doug sandra because you cortez and apparently threatening president biden. in a perfect world, he would be expelled from congress but she supports the houses resolution. jacob chain slate known as the qanon shaman has been sentenced to 41 months and prison. pictures went viral of him in the senate chamber. he has been in custody since his arrest. he pleaded guilty. they sent he will have three years of probation after serving his sentence. >> john: as we wait for action to resume, another big story we are following. an fbi whistle-blower coming forward with an internal email that is raising questions about attorney general merrick garland's testimony of up to congress last month where he said that the bureau is not targeting parents protesting school board meetings. marti's and standing by with his thoughts on all of this, but first, mike emanuel joins us now. you've seen the letter, what can you tell us? >> they receive from this whistle-blower an email dated on october 20th. it represents a new threat tag treated by the fbi counterterrorism. it directs fbi personnel to apply this to all assessments of threats. specifically against a school board administrators, board members, teachers, and staff. it goes on to say scoping this threat on a national level and providing opportunity for comprehensive analysis of the threat picture with law enforcement at all levels. attorney general has some explaining to do. >> he says i cannot imagine any circumstance where we give parents the label of domestic terrorist but in fact, the day before as you pointed out, the day before an email gets sent out to agents across this country saying just the opposite. >> in terms of the text of the fbi says they have been used to track drug trafficking to human trafficking and, "the tag is a statistic tool to track information for review and reporting. and in no way changes the long-standing requirements for opening an investigation nor does it represent a shift in how the fbi prioritizes threats. most quote we reviewed the rishel blowers letter and appears to be consistent. the judiciary republicans are not publicly releasing the letter. >> john: do we have any idea who might of been tagged? are they parents? >> not entirely clear at this point. interesting that the fbi's up and much about it. giving background guidance, but not coming to push back against concerns. >> john: but that's not something they want to give a lot of detail on. >> sandra: for more on this, let's bring an marc thiessen. former white house speechwriter. good to see. jim jordan went on with laura ingraham last night and he explained what he thinks this means about attorney general garland and how he needs to join itself. >> he either lied to us or he doesn't know. either one is bad for the country and bad for justice and america. he said i cannot imagine any circumstance where we give parents the label of domestic terrorist but the day before, as you pointed out, the day before an email gets sent out to agents across the country saying just the opposite. >> sandra: if he did know about the fbi threat tag as it's called, how are lawmakers going to get the bottom of this and find out the truth? >> the truth keeps dribbling out thanks to whistle-blowers. he's been lying about this from the first day. he said he adopted contact with the national school board association but then we got email saying that she'd been in contact with the justice department's that was untrue. he tried to distance itself from them by saying that my memorandum does not talk about domestic terrorism or the patriot act but when they release the memorandum, they simultaneously announced that he was created a task for it that include the national security division which was created by the patriot act. so they announced he was using the patriot act. another not targeting parents, but they have employed -- and by the way, the division doing this is the counterterrorism division of the fbi. they are using threat tags to tag parents who might be intimidating or threatening school board members. this is what we used to track isis and al qaeda. it's not something we should be using against american parents. he lied about that again. it's just one lie after another. speech on the fbi maintains that's statement to fox news that the memorandum is simply underscores the efforts to assist state and local partners to address threats of violence. regardless of motivation, fbi's never been in the business of investigating parent to speak out at public school board meetings and were not going start now. your final thoughts on this relationship between the president and the vice president and where it may or may not be in this moment in time. obviously, this administration is dealing with a lot of problems and a lot of crises on their hands. our congressional correspondent whom you know very well said that he has received an email from a source who wrote that he should, "start to familiarize yourself with the confirmation conference not just in the senate but in the house for vice president in case that she could be replaced." what you think that reporting? >> if they want to scapegoat, but the source of the problem is joe biden. this is a president whose in free fall. he is a 30% approval rating and that matches the lowest average that donald trump had. the difference is that unlike donald trump, he started at 56 approval. he had an 18-point collapse in one year. 64% of americans do not want him to run for a second term and 50 percent don't think he is in good mental or physical health to serve as president. this is a disaster and where harris's problem comes in is she is a safety valve. she is plan b. she is the who is supposed to step in and run it in case he can't run. she is less popular than him by 10. spirit she's at 28%. donald trump never got that low. speed truth they tried to put on a united front, but quickly, you are weighing in broadly on what could be growing risk between the two. would you ever think there was a possibility, going back to that report and that source who gave chad the heads up. is that something you would think would be considered or possible shark >> i don't doubt his sources at all. he's one of the best reporters in washington. it would be unprecedented. the only vice president in modern times who resigned was because he was about to be convicted of corruption and ended up pleading no contest to charges of accepting bribery. short of a scandal like that, it would be unprecedented for vice president to step down from office. being replaced on the ticket is one thing if biden was running, but to step down as unprecedented. >> sandra: to get your thoughts on that. always appreciate it. >> john: steve bannon is pleading not guilty to him to misdemeanor charges of criminal contempt of congress. the former tripadvisor is charged with refusing to cooperate with the subpoena from the committee investigating the january 6th riot. he says that the investigations politically motivated and it will be held tomorrow. as you can imagine, he is standing firm and opposition to this saying that they messed with the wrong guy and he is not backing down. speech of not guilty, he pleads, and this just came just a short time ago. as lawyers saying that he is charged with misdemeanor counts of criminal contempt and he had a written plea of not guilty to status hearing come as you just said. held tomorrow and it will be virtual. we will cover that as well. speaker of the house nancy pelosi vowing to see the house in session until they pass the massive social spending bill even if it means working through the thanksgiving holiday. but does she have the vote? >> when you have a big bill like this, your political futures on the line. i don't think it's going to work. i think the threat will be false and to hold out, if they are strong, they will say no we are quick to do it. she's going to cave and she will send them home for thanksgiving. ♪ ♪ just two pills for all day pain relief. aleve it, and see what's possible. and also try alevex topical pain relief. ♪♪ fresh flavors... classic dishes... ♪♪ and a new seat at the table. ♪♪ >> john: breaking news here. we want to take you to a court courtroom. you are looking at travis mcmichael who is the man who wielded a shotgun and pulled a trigger that killed amada marbury as he was running through a neighborhood and was confronted by the treatment. let's listen to travis mcmichael takings dude in in his own defense. >> at cas ii. it is search, examination, arrest sees, inspect, and inquire. >> can you tell us a little bit about the components of the training you had under this course chris mark >> i will give you the law. >> what law allows you to be coast guard law enforcement search officer? >> there were 14 ufc 89 alpha. it gave coast guard officers, petty officers which i was, and reserve of the same active-duty right to. >> this here is the code section that gave you the ability. >> yes. all vessels in u.s. territory and waters. >> did this course have a law component? a legal component? >> it did. >> what did the legal component address? >> it was the fourth amendment. search and seizures. >> arrest. >> yelp. >> in terms of did you also deal with the 50 moment was to mark >> we did. because to process and that nature? >> yes. >> did you learn terms like probable cause and reasonable suspicion question work >> we did. >> what was your training about probable cause? >> the definition that we received was a level of suspicion by reasonable person. >> i'm going to write it down. hold on. level of suspicion by a reasonable and prudent person. >> given the overall circumstances. >> given the overall circumstances. >> to believe a crime has been committed. >> let me go back to a component of training. did you have a component of your training called you sub force? >> yes. >> can you tell us what that is question work >> it is the level of force needed to compel compliance. we had acronyms and everything for that as well. we had use of force continuum. >> hold on. use of force. you said you had a continuum? >> yes. >> what does that mean? >> it is levels 1-6. >> did we agree on to using continuum? >> all right. continue. >> there are six levels. echoes from level one which is officer presence. >> what does that mean? officer presence? >> what we call showing the flag. having the flag and blue lights. you have blue lights in the uniforms. the presence, demeanor, badge, stuff like that. it usually compels. seeing a police officer or somebody who is -- an authoritative figure is usually all it has to do. >> to compel, comply, and what? >> to do what is needed or asked of the officer. >> including talking or making an arrest? >> yes. >> what is the next level question work >> the next it's verbal commands. >> what does that mean? >> casts, direction and consequence. >> give us a little bit of a working example. >> you're in active-duty law enforcement function and i would say, mr. sheffield, eight could you move to the side for me. if he moves to the side for me, if not i would move him. >> as their physical component or just you talking? >> no. it's just a verbal command. >> you can do what? >> i can do my job safely and effectively. >> is that volume-dependent? your voice? >> yes. voice inflection and tone is keying into it. being on a boat, shrimp boat or something like that come a lot engines and everything. if i'm trying to talk to you and you can't hear me coming or going to get aggravated. if my voice inflection is move over there, you might take it that i met set. but if i take everything into consideration and say excuse me, could you move over there for me? you use it every day. >> you use the word escalate. is it your goal to escalate situations question marks become absolutely not. >> why? >> you don't know where it's going to go from there. you want to keep everybody calm and cool and be able to do whatever task is at hand equally and effectively. >> what is the next level? after verbal command, what you do? >> control techniques. >> what does that mean? >> anything hands-on. a low probability of causing connective tissue damage or injury. >> what is the point of it? >> if the verbal commands did not work at that point, like i said earlier on, i will have to move you. if it goes to where i have to move you, i control you where i can safely get you to point a to point b. there's a normal application of handcuffs to control you, the subject, without any harm to myself or to you. >> what is the next level? >> level four was aggressive response techniques. >> what does that mean? >> kicks, stuns, and punches. and the use of pepper spray. >> okay. at what point does something like this become necessary? >> we have two types of subjects. probably easier if i said earlier, but levels one through three would be if they are passive and aggressive. you have passive compliant and passive resistor and then active resistor and active or is aggressor. >> you're talking about you or the person you dealing with? >> person you're dealing with. >> say again, please. >> you have levels. >> and you categorize them as? >> you passive and aggressive. they are broken into level one and two. passive compliant which is i ask you to do something and you do it. then passive resistor is -- it could go into level two or level three. could you were there for me? you don't. if you move there, i will have to move you. then you could be a passive resistor. no application of handcuffs. if i have to put my hands on you, your passive resistor. level four would be kicks and punches. that would be an active aggressor. >> someone who is it? >> someone who is trying to cause me harm. >> what is the next level after four question work >> intermediate weapons. >> what does that mean? >> with what we carry daily, it was the expandable baton. >> to be used? >> level five. if you are coming at me and trying to harm me, i'll probably use the baton. just to cause you to stop from harming me or others. >> level six? >> deadly force. >> okay. are you always moving from level one to level six? is it always moving through that progression? >> it is fluid nonstop. it depends on what is occurring there in the situation. it can go from level one to level six or level one to level for her four back to one. it is constantly flowing. it depends on whoever you are talking to and how they react. >> would like to talk about the physical training and experience you had with this type of thing. before i do that, i would like to ask you again about escalation to make sure. as it relates to that continuum, do you have any goals as it relates to de-escalation and this use of force? >> you want to keep it as minimal as possible. you do not want anything to escalate. >> you want the absence of escalation? >> correct. >> do you -- when you are with the coast guard, did you work with a team of others? >> yes. >> did you and your team ever do training as it related to these types of use of force continuums and search and seizure and arrest? >> we did. >> when would you do those? >> it was required -- minimally, it was required quarterly which is four times a year. four times a year. we had so many people go from e1-e3 before they made rank and it would be our boarding team members. during training i would go to, i was also trained a trainer. i was authorized to teach other coast guard's how to assist into boarding. we would have new coast guard coming and we were constantly training. it was probably a minimum of once a week. maybe two or three times and sometimes we dedicate a whole week to training. it would go from physical levels one through five. >> what you practice level one, officer presence? >> yes. anytime we were on the water was level one. >> my question is would you practice these various levels? >> yes. >> how would you practice some of these levels that start to get into physicality or higher verbal acuity? >> in training? >> yes. >> going into level four, we would have something called arrhythmia suit. we would bring everyone together and we would teach the techniques of the proper way to do it. taking time to strike someone in the head, that's deadly force and we do not want that to happen. we have to teach that you strike some and on the knee and force the body. how to properly do the stuff. we would do red man training which these guys would exercise on each other. level four and level five, we do handcuffs and practicing application. the entire time, were also doing level one and two. if we were in a scenario and it would depend if you are the boarding officer. how you interacted with me would be how i interact back with you. if you came in -- another acronym we use is called leaps. >> what is it? >> lesson do not listen. speak out his belt? speak out listen question work >> no, the acronym >> what is ee? >> empathize. ask questions. paraphrase. summarize. >> okay. and you are saying you would use leaps and you would teach it? >> if you go jump on a boat or a scenario like that, you get somebody very upset. instead of saying calm down, i'm here to do this come there's other ways to do it. what's going on question work what's wrong? what happened? explained to me what happened. >> my dog just died. empathize. i'm sorry that happened. i've had that have been to. >> empathy. is that we're talking about? >> i wrote down emphasize what you wrote and puff eyes. but you're trying saying share experiences. >> yes. the arming somebody. the whole goal to de-escalate. >> this can lead to de-escalation? >> absolute. >> have you ever had to use officer presence on the job? >> yes. every day. >> every day? did you ever use a verbal command on the job? >> very much so. >> did you use control techniques? >> i had to. >> have you ever had to use your aggressor response techniques to hit somebody in the meaty portion of the body question work >> no. >> did you ever had to use intermediate? >> never. >> deadly force? >> no. >> did you have any training on hand have combat? >> yes. >> did you have training on how to we can your weapon question work >> yes. >> can you talk about that? >> hva -- speak out that be in? >> high-value asset. >> they didn't pertain, but for weapon retention, we carried m-16 and we carried a shotgun which is a small shotgun. >> what was the type of training you had about weapon retention? what was it that you were training someone to do? >> how to keep your weapon from going into the hands of somebody was trying to take it from you. >> is it something you would practice question work >> absolutely. >> what is the concern of not retaining your weapon? >> you would not be able to protect yourself in a deadly situation and somebody taking it away from you would use it on you or others. >> did you have special training with a shock on? >> yes. >> did include how to retain it? >> gets. >> how to de-escalate the situation? >> yes. the same as other situations. >> explain that. how do you use a weapon to de-escalate a situation? >> considering it a level one which is officers present. you have an unaccounted for a person or known safety hazards which would have a weapon drawn. sometimes a third i which is right here. in that situation, it's level one because it's officer present. usually someone with a weapon and its officer presence. if you to draw your weapon, there was a reasonable possibility that the use of deadly force may be authorized which was another key component on that. >> tell me about that. reasonable possibility that deadly force, what? >> may be authorized to. >> what does that mean? do you. >> from the trainer we had, if you go into a situation where you do not know someone is armed or they have threats or made threatening gestures and you have a weapon that is holstered and they come toward you and the deadly force triangle or the attack triangle, your authorized to draw that weapon. >> what's the attack triangle? >> subject actions weapon an opportunity. >> action, weapon, and opportunity. how does that work? >> say there's a scenario where you threaten me. you are threatening me. weapon, we are told everyone has a weapon. hands and fists are weapons. the attack triangle would beat you are threatening me, you are close enough to attack, which is the opportunity, and then you made the threatening gesture that you're going to attack. at that point the attack triangle is closed and i would use level four or level five in that situation. there's also the deadly force triangle which is subject actions, weapon, and opportunity. on them weapon, maximum effective range is if it's readily accessible. >> range. what you mean by that? >> if you have a baseball bat near 50 yards away from me, the maximum effective range is no longer there. you're not gonna hurt me from the bad at 50 yards. if you're 50 yards away from me -- if i can see a gun on you and you are making threatening gestures, then the deadly force triangle is closed. >> when we asked you earlier if you had been trained to use a firearm to de-escalate the situation, is that something you trained to do? to use it to de-escalate but not shoot somebody? >> yes. under level one, having it out of the holster or having to draw down if need be if you felt that deadly force is authorized. >> when you say draw down, what you mean? speak up to have it pointed at you or at the subject that is being called a threat or may bea threat at the time. >> when you say drawdown and pointing, does that mean you're going to on holster? >> the possibility is there. but obviously, you're trying to de-escalate the situation. >> de-escalating the situation. how so? >> if you pull a gun on someone, they probably realize if this threat or you don't know it's on in the situation and you pull weapon on someone, from what i've learned in my training, usually that causes people to back off or realize what is happening. >> outside of your coast guard life and your coast guard work, did you carry firearms? >> yes. >> did you ever have to use those firearms before for protection? >> yes, i have. >> can you tell me about that? >> objection. >> it is relevant because he is carrying a gun. in this case, he is carrying a gun and i believe this testimony will establish why and the fact that he has had experiences with having to do this before informs him and informs a decision that he makes as a person under the circumstances. the fact that he has been in situations where he has to use his gun to protect himself before informs his decisions on november 23rd. >> relevant to what he did under the circumstances. >> you're talking about something he was doing in the coast guard. >> no, i'm talking about him as a private citizen where he has been out with a firearm during a firearm before rays had to use it to protect himself. >> if you could take a step into the jury room please. >> john: a brief pause in the amount are pretrial as travis mcmichael is taking the stand in his own defense as the defense begins rebuttal to the prosecution case which rested yesterday. this is all about the february 2020 shooting death of ahmad are brief who had been seen inside a house under construction just outside of brunswick, georgia, a number of times and was chased down by travis mcmichael, his father, and eight neighbor. it was travis mcmichael who fired from his shotgun. rejoined on the phone now with more details on the case. steve, what do you make of the defense of the mounting so far? it seems like his amount in the coast guard. >> it seems like they are trying to paint travis mcmichael in a very different way than he has been portrayed so far. you're hearing the few terms over and over again. de-escalate and training. you get the picture that he is a high level police detective from the technical terms used. in fact, he is a coast guard veteran and he is a machinery technician. there really going over and over the levels of the use of force f is he were a member of law enforcement. keep in mind, it he was not. he was three white men in 2020 chased down ahmed arbery in three vehicles and shot and killed him. the talk now is of de-escalation and training, but it does not square up with the picture from february 2020. >> john: sandra? we seem to have lost sandra. steve, are you still with us? >> yes, sir. >> john: he was a boarding officer which means he was one of the people go on board a ship and would talk to people on board. he was authorized to affect arrests. he talked about being on a shrimp boat and maybe the engines were loud and had to raise his voice. according to his father, they shouted at arbery who is running through the neighborhood to stop. travis mcmichael said he tried to block his way and that is when arbery grabbed his shotgun. he fired three shots at him point-blank before arbery succumbed. the defense is trying to suggest that they had the right under the repealed 19th century law in georgia to affect a citizen's arrest based on suspicions that he might've been stealing from the house under construction. what do you think of the case they are making on that point thus far? >> i think the case they are trying to make is they are trying to portray travis mcmichael as an officer of law enforcement. keep in mind what it was like back in february 2020 aired this was a 25-year-old black man who was jogging who stopped in a house under construction. no sign he had taken anything and within minutes he is being chased down by vehicles with men with guns. if you talk about de-escalation, you have to ask yourself if there is no evidence of violent crime and no physical evidence of theft and the eyewitness of theft, how did it escalate so quickly for shots against an unarmed man? >> john: thank you and please stand by. bernadette back into the arbery trial now and bring you back the defense attorney. he's question travis mcmichael. >> all rise for the jury. >> john: we are still in a little bit of a delay here as the defense is restarting the defense of travis mcmichael. we are also having a couple of technical difficulties with sandra as well which we will have to resolve in a moment. in the meantime, let's bring in phil holloway, former assistant attorney. as was being said, travis mcmichael was talking about using the weapon and using shouted to try to de-escalate the situation. in some peoples minds, it would appear in the video that the opposite was having. what do you think? speak up good afternoon. you're right. they are just getting started with this effort at the defendant's testimony. what they're trying to show, if they can, is that the defendant was acting reasonably and in his own mind it was reasonable to be objectively and fear for his life at the time those three shots were fired. they're just getting started and that's what this background information is about. it's about the use of force training at this defendant has received because that goes to the ultimate question of whether or not is pulling the trigger on that shotgun was objectively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances that he faced on the scene. >> john: you are from georgia. tell us a little bit about this now repealed law that these three men claimed they were acting under back in february of 2020. >> that was the self-defense lot -- excuse me, the citizen's arrest law that was in place at the time. as you mention, it's been repealed. it said that citizens, not just law enforcement, but citizens could make an arrest for crimes committed in their presence. it's a little bit, and my view, a red herring to say that is the linchpin of this case. they were not arresting anybody. of course there was a chase and you could argue whether or not the effort was to arrest him. this is about self-defense. what was it that was in the mind of these defendants at the time the deadly force was used the self-defense issue is relevant, but if not the complete linchpin of the case, at least not in my view. >> john: the three men allegedly saw ahmed arbery in this house down the street and apparently he had been seen in the house before. they were watching out for whoever it might be that was stopping by the construction site. apparently nothing was ever taken, either. the idea that travis mcmichael is talking about using the threat of deadly force to de-escalate, does that seem to be reasonable or unreasonable in the situation that unfolded as it ahmaud arbery was running down the street? >> let's see where they go at that. it's not going to be anything to be deescalated if you weren't chasing him in the first place. it remains to be seen how far the defense is going to be allowed to go and how far they will go. bear in mind that they have the burden of proof here that they were acting in self-defense. that is why you see this defendant on the stand and it remains to be seen, of course, whether it's going to be additional defense evidence or witness. they need to prove that it was self-defense and that shifts it back to the prosecution to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. spew and stay with us and stand by. let's go back to the courtroom now where jason chatfield is questioning travis mcmichael in the field, extent. >> i want to focus your attention. was there ever a time that you yourself tried to figure out if any particular person was involved in some of the crime that had been happening over the summer in 2019? >> yes. >> could you tell us a little bit about that circumstance? >> yes. i believe it was july, the 1st of july, my neighbor at the time came downstairs. she had her purse stolen. her personal and out of her vehicle. we talked about it. something else is happening. a few days later, we are so later, i was coming back from a fishing trip. i've a boat chewing charters on the side and i was coming back to my house. under the bridge. we got under there. >> i'm going to pull this back because the state has a similar exhibit that they've used. this being the google earth image. >> i was coming from the north coming down to fancy bluff. >> you are aware? >> in my boat. i saw a bunch of trash. tarps, old tackle box down there. just a bunch of trash. and i thought it looked like a homeless camp. very close to the neighborhood. there's a trail that goes to it, actually. we thought that a neighbor had her purse stolen so we thought it might be a homeless person -- if there was a homeless person. got home and finish of the client. >> me stop you there. we don't see home on the map here, but does this connect coming up around on that side? >> it does. it joins south of the neighborhood. >> you boated around back to your dock? >> yes. >> go ahead. >> got back, finished the client, and told my father that it looked like there was a homeless camp under the bridge and a person was just stolen. let's see if there's anybody down there. he said i'll join you. so we get in my truck. i carry a weapon everywhere. i've concealed weapon. i don't know if my dad was or not. first we tried it on the neighborhood side of the road. >> is there an access point? >> there's a power line that parallels the neighborhood and the highway. it's an overgrown field. we couldn't get to it from there. rocks and stuff were just too bad. i drove across highway 17 onto fancy bluff road and there is a little trail. >> the drive comes across 17. is that fancy bluff appear? >> i believe it is. there's a wooded lot directly across in a four wheeler trailer that parallels the highway there. >> what did you do? >> me and my dad walked on the four wheeler trail and he's behind me. goes down and meanders around a couple of trees and gets to the creek and makes a right goes under the bridge. i turn and go down the bridge. i don't see anybody. i get under the northbound lane and see someone fishing right at the bank. he had a machete, i guess. or a really long knife. right next to him. he doesn't see me. i was going to get between him and then i've. >> let me stop you there. as you are doing this, you're going down with your sidearm. how do you feel comfortable to go down to inspect the situation? >> i didn't see any threat. there was no threat. at first i didn't see anybody down there, and if i did i would talk to them. >> then what happened? >> i get between him and his knife. >> why did you do that? >> for safety. talk to him. said how are you doing and he was a friendly guy. i asked him if he was living under the bridge and he told us that he wasn't. told us he was living on a road off a fancy bluff road and the neighborhood. i don't harbor what the road was. i told him straight up there's a bunch of stuff being stolen this neighborhood and seeing if anything's down here. he said he hadn't seen anything so we looked around. i think my dad looked at some of the tarps and it wasn't his stuff. i'm certain that he was living under that bridge. >> you say you didn't see anything. what were you looking for question works because looking to see if there is persons or equipment. anything. boat, tackle box, purses, anything that would be odd. i wouldn't have taken it up. my dad called the nonemergency number and informed the police. they were aware, obviously, what was going on in the neighborhood and told them that there is a homeless person under the bridge could you check it out for us? >> let me stop you there and just make sure were on the same page. >> can have a contact number for you? >> 912, 217, 1726. >> your address? >> 2:30 priscilla drive. >> we had automobile break-ins and my son and i just discovered a guy and we think he's living under fancy bluff creek bridge on 17. >> yes. >> did you discuss this finding of sorts? did you discuss it with anyone else in the neighborhood? >> i did. >> who did you discuss it with? >> i remember him randy park my direct neighbor. there was another guy down the road. an older fella. i can't remember. >> to know whether or not the subject of someone living under the fancy bluff bridge being the suspect of things happening in the neighborhood, whether that subject came up anymore over the course of the next five or six months? >> is always there. it was always in the back of people's mind. you'd see it on the facebook neighborhood page. there's been a homeless person around. from that moment forward, people knew there was a homeless person under that bridge. speak out now i want to ask you about 220. did you ever hear anything about thefts or things being stolen from 220? >> i did. >> when did you hear it? >> the first was from my mother. she heard it from someone or sought on facebook and told the community. then i started seeing it on the facebook page. >> did you speak to anybody other than your mother? >> at first, no. >> did you ever talk to diego perez about it? >> not until february 11th. >> what was it that you understood was stolen from 220? >> from my mother i heard it there is equipment stolen off the boat and 220. we talked about it. he said you know their stuff stolen out of that house. >> did you know about the man who lived or was building? >> i met him once. >> did you know anything about him questioning whether he was living on the property? >> i knew that he stayed on the property on the weekends and stuff like that. when i first met him, he had a camper in the backyard. for my understanding, he was working on the house and spent time there. he would stay at the house in the camper. she wasn't living in the house that he was building. >> generally speaking, you learn to let boat was stolen and that the owner was living on a camp on the property on the weekends. >> yes. >> did you over investigate anything about 220 in 2019? >> no. >> the land, search the residence, do any follow up on stolen goods or anything? >> now. >> did you ask you could help steal, and catch stolen property >> were you the victim of crime? >> i was. >> when question rick >> januar. >> what happened? >> ida pistol stolen out of my truck. it was smaller. >> that was when? >> january 1st. new year's. >> do you know how it was stolen? >> yes. my dad moved the vehicle that morning between 9:30 and 11. moved it closer to the side of the road to the adjacent property right on the road. i came down about 1145 to go somewhere. open to the truck and the door was unlocked. i don't know if you let it unlocked, but so my holster was in the seat. i asked my dad if he moved my gun and he said he did not. i looked around the house and make sure that i did not misplace my pistol for some odd reason. came to the conclusion that my pistol stolen i called and reported it. >> said you called. who did you call? >> the county police department. >> i need a police officer. i need to report a stolen pistol. >> you what? >> i need a police officer. i need to report a stolen pistol. >> what is the address it was stolen from? >> 230 priscilla drive. >> was at the call? >> yes. >> another pistol stolen from you? >> no. >> were you concerned about the missing of your gun? >> yes. >> wide question rick >> number one, i don't know who has the question. it was stolen on my truck. i didn't know what they're doing with my gun. they could harm themselves or use it to harm someone else or use it for a crime. >> did you hear about guns being stolen in the neighborhood? >> yes. >> did you know what it was you were hearing? >> i heard of vehicles being broken into. speech you were going to take a break out of this and go to capitol hill. were in the house floor were nancy pelosi and the house is debating representative gaucher century. this is ahead of a vote which would strip the arizona lawmaker of his committee assignments. this is in response to him tweeting that edited video showing him killing alexandria ocasio-cortez and threatening biden. aoc responded saying that in a perfect world he would be expended from congress. >> thank you for bringing this legislation forward. bring this resolution forward and i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentle lady from indiana. speak up madam speaker, i yield to the distinguished minority leader. >> he is recognized for one minute. >> thank you madam speaker. there is an old definition of abuse of power. rules for the, but not for me. that's exactly what is happening here today. house democrats are preparing once again to break another president of the united states house of representatives. it's an open secret that the american people are facing substantial challenges today. many of these challenges are washington inflicted of one-party rule caused by a biden administration incompetence and radicalism. absolute chaos on the southern border. out-of-control crime. record-breaking grass prices and inflation. a broken supply chain. a historic labor shortage. a failing education system. and of course, the humiliating surrender and afghanistan. well this congress be remembered as a congress that addressed those serious challenges? not a chance. instead, i believe this congress will go down in history as the broken congress. for nearly four years, the house republicans have been voicing the needs of millions of americans and house democrats have broken nearly every rule and standard. in order to silence dissidents and stack the deck for the radical unpopular agenda. they broke the motion to recommit the first time in the history and congress prayed they broke impeachment not once, but twice. they broke in person voting and replaced it with proxy voting. the first time in history. and they broke the minorities right to appoint members of its own choosing to committees. the speaker is burning down the house on her way out the door. what's worse is that we got to this point on the basis of a double standard. democrats want to change the rules but refuse to apply them to their own caucus. i listen to the speaker talk about the highest standards. madam speaker, when a democratic charwoman flew to minneapolis and told people stay on the streets and get more active and get more confrontational, we have to make sure they know we need business. that high standard, the democrats refused to take action. the trial judge actually singled her out on her comments on an ongoing basis which she said could become an issue on appeal. but this was not the first time. no. this is three times. at our rally in los angeles, that same chairwoman, she told them off. if you see anyone from that cabinet in a restaurant, and a department store, and a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. you push back on them. you tell them that they are not welcome anymore anywhere. she later defended the comment in another speech in a late saying the same chairwoman of the high standards. i did not threaten trump's constituents reporters. i do not all the time. but i didn't do it that time. the side of the aisle did not ask that you want to lose her committee. we simply asked for an apology. meanwhile, that high standard with speaker pelosi and leader hoyer defended her. when asked about her might happy us, it's, she was described as passionate. she believed in her issues. she believes that she get your faces. speaker pelosi? what did she do? without high standard. she compared her comments in minneapolis to dr. king's civil rights movement. you see? why would they do that? rules for the but not for me. just this month, the dossiers principal source was arrested by special counsel durham for lying to the fbi. think about everything that dossier but this country through for two years based on fabricated evidence. the infringement of due process. the spying on the presidential campaign. and of course, the $32 million spent by hard-earned working taxpayers for a mueller investigation. yet, the democratic chairman says i don't regret it. why? rules for thee but not for me. when the speaker of the house on this very floor engaged in personalities, the floor shut down for three hours. no one wanted to take to the top. her entire caucus that believed in a higher standard voted to keep her words in the record rather than strike them down. why? rules for thee but not for me. the speaker said i stand by my statement and i'm proud of the attention that is being called to it. never happened before in the history of this body. why? it's a broken congress that believes in rules for thee and not for me. this is part of a larger pattern. when a congressman on the intelligence committee was targeted by a suspected chinese communist party agent for years, the democrats kept him on the committee. why? rules for thee but not for me. when a democratic congresswoman said israel was hypnotized by the world. that supporting israel is all about the benjamins. and said that 9/11, some people did something. the democrats defended her. why? rules for thee but not for me. when a member of the democratic leadership tweeted one week ago lock up kyle rotten house and throw away the key in an attempt to sway an ongoing trial, the democrat said nothing. why? rules were thee but not for me. let me be clear. i do not condone violent and representative goes or has echoed that sentiment. the video was deleted, but democrats won't listen because they will do anything to distract from the failure of one-party rule in one year destroying the nation. for democrats, this is not about a video but about control. that is the one and only thing democrats are interested in. not condemning violence and not protecting the institution. not decorum or decency. just control. democrats want control and they don't care about the consequences. they are destroying this institution and silencing the minority. therefore, silencing millions of americans. when i talked to democrat leadership and when they told me what they wanted to do, i asked a simple question. have you seen the video? no. have not seen. but they know exactly what they wanted to do. it's interesting. without even watching, they decided the punishment. why? no need. rules for thee but not for me. what they have started cannot be easily undone. their actions today and the past have forever changed the way that the house operates. it means that the minority rights that have served this body as well our things of the past. and it means that under the pelosi president, all of the members i mentioned earlier will need the approval of a majority to keep those positions in the future. what's interesting is that it's not just the speaker that's making those decisions. when the chairwoman and cited those three times, everyone in the democratic party had the ability to vote for what they thought. because of those high standards. they all voted to table. they all voted to table. not to remove this chairwoman from committee. to ask for an apology. why? because you all believe it in rules for thee but not for me. that legacy is a real culmination of speaker pelosi's career. make no mistake, the house is weaker, more partisan, and more self focused today then when speaker pelosi became speaker less than four years ago. future congress will suffer for it. more importantly, the american people have needlessly suffered because of it. they won't soon forget it. it is about control. it is not about a standard that everybody lives by. it is a standard you enforce on one but not yourself. you encourage your own side to engage further when you all took a vote to table. it will be interesting to see if your leadership hasn't watch the video. how many of you who vote today have watched? when it was requested, i contacted the member. he took the video down and put a statement that he does not believe in violence to anyone. but you see, when others on the other side of the aisle incite violence, it's okay. because as rules for thee but not for me. unfortunately, this body has suffered greatly and a new standard will continue to be applied in the future. i yelled back. >> the chair will recognize the gentleman from florida. speak up speaker, i yield 5 minutes to representative out because jo cortez. speak of the china lady from new york is recognized for 5 minutes. >> think you chairman and thank you madam speaker. i've been serving and this body for just under three years. and that three years, enormous amounts of happened. in response to the republican leaders remarks when he says that this action is unprecedented, what i believe is unprecedented is for a member of house leadership of either party to be unable to condemn incitement of violence against a member of this body. it is sad. it is a sad day in which a member who leads a political party in the united states of america cannot bring themselves to say that issuing eight depiction of murdering a member of congress is wrong and instead decides to venture off into a tangent of gas prices and inflation. what is so hard? what is so hard about saying that this is wrong? this is not about me. this is not about representative goes our. this is about what we are willing to accept. not just of the republican leader, but i've seen other members of this party advance the argument including representative gosar himself. the illusion that this is just a joke. what we say and what we do does not do so long as we claim a lack of meaning. this nihilism runs deep and it conveys and betrays a certain contempt for the meaning and importance of her work here. that what we do, so long as we claim it is a joke, it does not matter. what we say here does not matter. that our actions every day as elected leaders in the united states of america doesn't not matter. that this chamber and what happens and it doesn't matter. i am here to rise and say that it does. our work here matters. our example matters. there is meaning in our service. as leaders in this country come up we incite violence with depictions against our colleagues, that trickles down into violence in this country. that is where we must draw the line. independence of party identity or belief. it is about the core recognition of human dignity and worth. when we talk about the resolution that these depictions are part of a larger trend of misogyny and racial misogyny. racist misogyny. this has results in dampening participation. this vote is not as complex as perhaps the republican leader would like to make folks believe. it is pretty cut and dry. does anyone in this chamber find this behavior acceptable? will you allow depictions of violence against women, colleagues. would you allow that in your home? do you think they should happen on a school board? in a city council? in a church? if it's not acceptable they are, why should it be accepted here? lastly, when the republican leader rose to talk about how there are all of these double standards in a litany of different things, not once did he list an example of a member of congress threatening the life of another. this is not about a double standard and what is unprecedented and what is tragic is the dissent of transgression in this body. i grew up as a little girl with awe about our nation's capital. the reverence and the importance and the gravity of our work here. >> i yield an additional 30 seconds. >> recognize. >> the gravity of our work here. the question i posed to this body and response is will be live up to the promises we make our children? this is a place where we will defend one of our another regardless of belief. that our core of human dignity matters. if you believe that this behavior is acceptable, go ahead. vote no. but if you believe this behavior should not be accepted, vote yes. it is that simple. in q and i yield back to the charming. >> gentle lady from indiana. >> madam speaker, i yield as much time as i may consume. >> i am not here to defend any comments made by representative gosar or his staff. and i condemn all acts of violence. in fact, i'm a recent violent stomach victim of violence. a political activist attempted to run me over with his car. when this happened, i contacted law enforcement. if members of congress anywhere any time feel threatened, they should contact the police. unfortunately, this posted video is not the first video or the statement by a member of congress inciting or depicting violence. members on both sides of the aisle have made choices that i surely would not have made. as a ranking member of the health ethics committee, i find myself on the floor mount for the second time this year. to address an issue that has been referred to ethics but has seen no committee process before coming to the floor for a vote. yesterday afternoon the majority party drafted this resolution and scheduled this debate for a vote today. the house ethics committee has had no time to consider this matter through the ethics committee process. and there is a process. the nonpartisan staff should have had the time to research and gather information. the committee members should have had conversations before making a decision on whether and how to move forward with any further investigation. the chairman claims to have reached out and schedule an emergency committee meeting last night. reality is that he did so. speech of the house continues to debate the centering of represented speech when he went over the video he sent that the democrats say was inciting violence. as you heard from aoc herself moments ago, she says it's about racial misogyny and asked if anyone finds his behavior acceptable. you heard from kevin mccarthy earlier as well paying dems are guilty of double standard and repeating many times rules for thee and not for -- rules for me and not for thee. >> john: if he is centered in a vote, it will come this afternoon. it would be the first time since charlie rangel with center back in 2010 that a member of congress has been censured to that punishment. want to jump back to brunswick, georgia, where travis mcmichael one of the men whose accused of killing ahmaud arbery is taking the stand. moments ago, he said that he believed at the time that ahmaud arbery was armed with a handgun and they played a recording of a 911 called that mcmichael made telling the operator he believed that arbery had a gun in his left pocket and he was likely prepared to use it. let's listen in as the defense attorney resumes taking testimony from his clients, travis mcmichael. >> alarming why? >> i would think that anyone acting normal would do that. someone that is willing to act like they have a gun or act like they will harm you to prevent you from doing anything there and be normal and nonchalant. ed sets off alarms for me. >> okay. >> it's bold. the way that he's acting is very... it's a bold move. >> you mentioned that you are aware of boat equipment being stolen back in october from the house. did you see any of the videos of 220 that night? >> stills, i believe. >> tells of what? >> i believe it was around the dock. >> any other ones? >> i cannot recall which ones. i think they did show another one of him walking around in the evening time. i was told for the first time that it was the same guy that's been in the house several times. >> moving to february 11th, the idea of crime happening in the neighborhood, had you fumbled that even further to determining who would be responsible for trucks they got point, yes. >> or who was responsible for stealing the boat equipment? >> yes. spill who did you think it was? >> i thought it was person i just had the encounter with on february 11th. >> and what was it that you thought he was doing into 2020? >> he was breaking back in i was way to steal more stuff. >> did you talk with anyone else about crime? >> a couple days later. i am sure that we talked about it some evening. i spoke to diego perez also heard same conversation. have you heard anything about it and stuff like that. >> i want to move into february 23rd. >> are going to take a 15 minute recess and we will you back for continuation. >> all rights for the jury. >> john: they're going to take a short break there in the ahmaud arbery trial. the trial of traffic mcmichael, his father as well and others who were there that dan february 2020 when ahmaud arbery was shot point blank three times with a shotgun. you been watching. your thoughts? >> sandra: a lot of breaking news and a two hours we've been covering all of this. we have the trial in ahmaud arbery killing and at the kyle rittenhouse try we been watching all afternoon. although we are taking in the debate happening in the house floor. phil holloway is joining us. ph, you can taking through a lot of this. the accused shooter has been testifying for a couple hours now in the arbery trial. your thoughts so far on what you've heard? >> good afternoon. what i have heard so far is that i have heard the defense doing their best effort to bring the jury inside the head of this defendant. what they have to deal, if they can, it's show that he was acting objectively reasonable and he was subjectively in reasonable fear for his life here and that's a mouthful, but the bottom line is that the only person who knows what he was thinking at that time with him. >> john: it's john. i'm sorry we have to cut you off there for a second. congressman paul gosar of arizona speaking on the floor. >> this parties considering passing the $4.9 trillion spending bill that provides $100 billion for amnesty to tens of thousands of illegal aliens already in this country. this is what the left does not want the american people to know. our country is suffering from a plague illegal immigration. i won't stop putting this out nor will i. millions of illegal aliens trucks and human traffickers are being led and it moved around this country and the dead of night. all being condoned by this administration. for this cartoon, some in congress suggest i should be punished. i've said decisively that there is no threat in the cartoon other than the threat that immigration poses to our country. and no threat was intended by my staff for me. the american people deserve to hear the voices heard and congress no matter how much the left tries to quiet me, i will t against amnesty for illegal aliens. defend the rule of law and advance the first agenda. >> the chairman is recognized for 30 seconds. >> if i must join alexander hamilton the purse person to be censored by this house, so be it. it is done. manno speaker, i healed back. speak up gentleman from florida. >> madame speaker, i yield 3 minutes to the author of this resolution. >> that gentle lady is recognized for 3 minutes. >> i think my colleague for giving me this time. i take no pleasure in introducing this resolution. no one asked me to introduce it or test tapped me on the shoulder. i am a victim of violence and i know what it's like. i was in the galley clamoring for life when the shots ring out in the speakers lobby. we are here today because a sitting member thought it was okay to post a deranged animated video of himself kelling a fellow member of this house. and also attacking the president of the united states. that video has been seen by 3 million people. it was up for over two days before it was taken down. inciting violence begets violence. >> sandra: at the author of that center is now speaking on capitol hill as this debate continues. we heard from nancy pelosi, aoc herself who was featured in that video that she's describing there. we heard from kevin mccarthy as well earlier. he spoke before on rules for me not for thee. accusing democrats of a double standard wanting to censure him making a case that this has happened from their side of the isle as well. >> john: let's go back to the trial in brunswick, georgia. let's bring in phil holloway, former assistant district attorney. we are speaking with him because of trials and a little bit of a recess. sorry for jumping in on you there, we just wanted to make sure we got congressman gosar talking about the century resolution against him. the defense has tried to present a case of self-defense. when you look at how the has unfolded, deadly force to protect property. does that allow him to claim self-defense in the state of georgia? >> i don't think this is about defense of property and so much that it is about who is the initial provocateur and who started the whole thing? this whole sad affair was caused by the defendant when they decided to chase arbery when he was running down the road. what the defense is going to say is no, that was a separate incident and the initial part that provoked us into shooting was one arbery attacked us. that's what the defense argument is going to be. they are to show they can, that there actions were reasonable and they were in reasonable fear for their lives in the front of that truck and you see arbery making a turn and going in the direction of the shooter. that is when the shooting occurs. it's not at all unlike the arguments that we've seen in rittenhouse with defendant is going to say if this person had taken my gun for me, i don't have to wait for them to get the gun and use it against me. we heard something new. we heard that the defendant believes that the defendant believes that arbery was armed with a handgun. according to the stomach what i just heard, he made the claim when he spoke to law enforcemen. explaining to the journey don't jury what was in the mind of the shooter and we have to learn what was happening in the mindse other defendants as well as thel moves forward. >> sandra: as far as travis mcmichael is concerned and this is the first to be testifying in his own words, "getting my side of the story," how do you think they plan to proceed, the defense, as we watch it all play out? >> at the defense the burden of the proof. self-defense, like many things, and self affirmative. they're doing it through this witness and it remains to be seen whether they're going to have any other witnesses. i suspect they will. the key question is what about the other defendants? will the jury hear from those remaining defendants? >> john: apparently the defense is planning his calling as many as 30 witnesses which means the trial will likely stretch in and next week. we have to jump to take a break before martha show your thank you for joining us. >> sandra: the rittenhouse trial break is in trial right now. that one and the ahmaud arbery killing. we been monitoring that and the debate on the house floor. we will take a break and that ends a show for us. i'm sandra smith. >> john: the story with martha maccallum starts right after the break. don't go away. you can borrow up to 100% of your home's value to upgrade the kitchen, add a pool for the grandkids, or have the security of cash in the bank. with an average cash out amount of $60,000, you can do more. :. bogeys on your six, limu. they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual so they only pay for what they need. woooooooooooooo... we are not getting you a helicopter. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ♪ ♪ learning is hard work. hard work requires character. learning begins in faith. it must move upwards toward the highest thing, unseen at the beginning - god. and freedom is essential to learning. its principles must be studied and defended. learning, character, faith, and freedom: these are the inseparable purposes of hillsdale college. no one can deliver your mom's homemade short ribs. for starters, your mom doesn't have a restaurant. if she did, it would be impossible to get in. she'd become famous overnight. she'd get talked into franchising everything. and at that point, they wouldn't really taste like your mom's short ribs. no one can deliver your mom's homemade short ribs. that's why instacart helps deliver the ingredients. your record label is taking off. but so is your sound engineer. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire this is a va mortgage rate watch from newday usa. matching your job description. while national mortgage rates are starting to climb, newday is holding the line at two and a quarter percent, 2.48 apr, the lowest in their history. refi now. >> martha: very busy afternoon. i'm martha maccallum in new york. here's one of the huge -- really three big stories we're following for you right now. the courthouse in kenosha, wisconsin where the jury has asked several questions of the judge in this case. things that they want to focus on, that they want to look at again as they deliberate the file of kyle rittenhouse. they asked to rewatch a couple of videos. we have specifics at what they're looking at when they go back into the

Related Keywords

Case , Questions , Everything , U S , Laughter , Faces , Down , Nobody Saw , Dagen , Coming , Glass , Leo , Sandra Smith , In Kenosha , News , Coverage , Wisconsin , Fox News , John Roberts , Kyle Rittenhouse , Jury Deliberations , Jury Delivery , America Reports , D2 , Hello , Spoon Good , New York , Washington , Video , Jury , Evidence , Men , Aggressor , Women , Protest , Seven , Five , Two , Courthouse , Wall , Officials , Building , Crowd , Third , Outside , Edge , Alexis Mccracken , Defense , Judge , Action , Courtroom , Lot , Prosecution , Couple , Front , Seats , Impact , Jurors , Things , Instructions , Room , Pages , 30 , Times , Process , Decisions , Pictures , Some , Drudge Bruce Schroeder , Clips , Trial , Motion , Chance , Haven T , Mistrial , It , State , Criticism , Role , The One And Only , People , Making , Television , Trunk , One , Court , Victims , Three , Oman , Crime , Term , Victim Push Tonic , Prejudging , Arm , Weapon , Jury Deliberation , Protesters , Permit , License , Ar 15 Walkout Outside , Sheriff Deputies , 15 , Unrest , Police Shooting , Deputies , Jacob Lake , Others , Sides , Life In Prison , 18 , Question , Breaking News , Assistant Attorney , Andy Mccarthy , Jupiter , The Way , Video Evidence , It Hundreds Of Times , Exhibits , Documents , Place , Videos , Jury Room , Reason , Order , Lines , Ministerial , Part , Importance , Substance , Confrontation , Basis , Piece , Guy , Encounter , Connection , Shot , Joseph Rosenbaum , Name , Assailant , Lawyers , Charge , Youth , Spiel , Resolution , Possession , Megabytes , Copy , 11 2 , 3 6 , Problem , Something , Discovery , Timing , Quality , Arguments , Drone Exhibit , Leeway , Chart , Summation , Idea , Argument , Drone Video , Record , Prosecutors , Demonstrative Exhibit , Rittenhouse , Effect , Basis Of , Portion , Middle , Viewers , Reporter , Point , Nature , Stand By , Number , Law Attorney , Viewer Numbers , Photos , Jonathan Turley , The Law Professor , Speculation , Trigger , Provocation , Proximity , Above , Vote , Votes , Insight , Jokers , Counts , Difficulties , Stage , Effort , Housekeeping , Points , Summations , It Jurors , O Language , Disagreement , Deadlock , Terms , Parties , Type , Challenges , Representations , Species , Pull , Types , Statements , Doubts , Crowds , Attorneys , Steps , Reporters , Pool , Bench , Chambers , Monitors , Verdict , Jury Decisions , Deliberations , 10 , 8 , Paul Manafort , Look , Cases , Four , 16 , Deliberation , Due Diligence , Procedural , Request , Ruling , Council , Error , Silent , Demonstration Evidence , Viewing , State Rules , Guess , Client , Felt , Vision , Rules , Everyone , Course , Life , Anywhere , Both , Will Standby , Republican , Member , Opportunity , Congress , District , City , Decision , Thoughts , Amendment , Play , Hard Member Community , Manner , Kenosha Family , Behavior , Safety , Criminal Behavior , Breakdown , Individuals , Public Safety , Incident , Contingency Plans , There S , Hand , Resources , 500 , Troops , National Guard , 250 , 125 , Community , Message , Police , Phone , Communities , Law Enforcement , Consequences , Congressman , Signs , 25 , 2020 , August 25th 2020 , Tonya Mclean , Reasons , Safe , Kenosha Community Activist , Wake , Side , Nothing , Posture , Folks , 7 , 00 , Fine Line , First Amendment Rights , Out In The Street , President , Dad , Governor , Wasn T , Immunity , Offer , Lesson , Reestablished , Essential Resources , Preparations , Lawmaker , Committee Assignment , House Lawmakers Debating , Paul Gosar , Arizona , Response , Joe Biden , Doug Sandra , In A Perfect World , Democratic , You Cortez , Jacob Chain Slate , Prison , Houses Resolution , Qanon Shaman , 41 , Arrest , Senate , Custody , Email , Fbi , Testimony , Merrick Garland , Whistle Blower , Story , Probation , Sentence , Parents , First , Marti , Standing , School Board , Bureau , Meetings , Mike Emanuel , Threat , Tag , Letter , October 20th , 20 , Level , Threats , Staff , Board Members , Personnel , Counterterrorism , School Board Administrators , Assessments , Teachers , Scoping , Levels , Picture , Analysis , Fact , Country , Circumstance , Agents , Terrorist , Label , Opposite , Reporting , Information , Human Trafficking , Drug Trafficking , Tool , Review , Text , Investigation , Republicans , Requirements , Quote , Judiciary , Shift , Rishel Blowers , Background Guidance , Speechwriter , White House , Concerns , Detail , Marc Thiessen , Jim Jordan , Doesn T Know , Attorney General , Last Night , Laura Ingraham , Garland , Justice , Truth , Lawmakers , Bottom , Contact , Thanks , Dribbling , National School Board Association , Memorandum , The Patriot Act , Terrorism , Justice Department , Task , Division , Security , School Board Members , Counterterrorism Division , Isis , Al Qaeda , Speech , Statement , Another , Efforts , Lie , Violence , Partners , Parent , Motivation , Business , Public School Board Meetings , In Modern Times , Hands , Administration , Correspondent , Crises , Problems , Relationship , Rotten House , Source , Confirmation Conference , Scapegoat , Donald Trump , Average , Difference , Approval Rating , Free Fall , Disaster , Approval , Health , Collapse , 64 , 56 , 50 , Harris , Safety Valve , Plan B , Run , Speed , Spirit , United Front , Low , 28 , Possibility , Report , Risk , The Heads Up , Chad , Sources , Shark , One Of The Best , Contest , Charges , Corruption , Bribery , Scandal , Thing , Steve Bannon , Office , Ticket , Running , January 6th Riot , Committee , Misdemeanor Charges , Investigations , Criminal Contempt Of Congress , Tripadvisor , Subpoena , January 6th , 6 , Opposition , Saying , Speaker Of The House , Misdemeanor Counts , Criminal Contempt , Plea , Status Hearing , Bill , Nancy Pelosi , Spending , Line , Futures , Cave , Pain Relief , Alevex Topical Pain Relief , Pills , Aleve , Seat , Flavors , Dishes , Table , Court Courtroom , Neighborhood , Shotgun , Questioning Travis Mcmichael , Treatment , Amada Marbury , Travis Mcmichael Takings Dude In , Cas Ii , Examination , Bit , Law , Training , Components , Law Enforcement Search Officer , Coast Guard , Ufc 89 Alpha , 14 , 89 , Officers , Reserve , Yes , Code Section , Ability , Component , Law Component , Territory , Waters , Vessels , Seizures , Yelp , Cause , Alexander Hamilton , Work , Suspicion , Definition , Hold On , Circumstances , Force , Use , Continuum , Compliance , Acronyms , 1 , Officer Presence , Echoes , Six , Presence , Lights , Flag , Uniforms , Badge , Demeanor , Somebody , Stuff , Police Officer , Figure , Officer , Commands , Talking , Direction , Consequence , Working Example , Casts , Law Enforcement Function , Mr , Sheffield , Eight , Command , Job , Boat , Shrimp Boat , Voice Inflection , Voice , Keying , Tone , Engines , Move , Goal , Consideration , Escalate , Word , Set , Situations , Everybody , Question Marks , Anything , Control Techniques , Probability , Connective Tissue Damage , Injury , Subject , Handcuffs , Application , Point B There , Harm , Kicks , Punches , Response Techniques , Stuns , Pepper Spray , Subjects , Resistor , Passive Compliant , Passive Resistor , Someone , Weapons , Expandable Baton , Baton , Deadly Force , Situation , Progression , Back , Escalation , Goals , Absence , Correct , Team , Continuums , Seizure , Quarterly , Trainer , Boarding Team Members , Boarding , Minimum , Water , Physicality , Verbal Acuity , Arrhythmia Suit , Way , Head , Techniques , Body , Each Other , Knee , Guys , Red Man , Scenario , Boarding Officer , Acronym , Leaps , Work No , Belt , Ee , Calm Down , Ways , Dog , Share Experiences , Empathy , Eyes , Puff , Arming Somebody , Absolute , Question Work , Combat , Weapon Question , Hva , Weapon Retention , Asset , M 16 , Concern , Absolutely , Shock , Safety Hazards , Unaccounted , Attack Triangle , Triangle , Gestures , Actions , Attack , Gesture , Fists , Range , Baseball Bat , Gun , Firearm , Holster , Draw , May , Pointing , Drawdown , Firearms , Protection , Objection , Before , Experiences , November 23rd , 23 , Citizen , Rays , Step , Amount , Stand , Pause , Brief , Rebuttal , Death , Ahmad , February 2020 , Neighbor , Brunswick , House Under Construction , Georgia , Father , Details , Machinery Technician , Veteran , Police Detective , Mind , Ahmed Arbery , Vehicles , Talk , Sir , Ship , Board A , Arrests , Shots , Point Blank , Arbery Succumbed , House , Citizen S Arrest , Suspicions , Stealing , 19th Century , 19 , Old Black Man , Sign , Jogging , Theft , Guns , De Escalation , Eyewitness , Bernadette , Defense Attorney , Rise , Delay , Phil Holloway , Minds , Defendant , Show , Fear , Background Information , Whether , Scene , Totality , Self Defense Lot , February Of 2020 , Crimes , Citizens , Anybody , Linchpin , My View , Red Herring , Beyond A Reasonable Doubt , Defendants , Self Defense Issue , View , Street , Saw , Construction Site , De Escalate , The Street , Proof , Burden , Bear , You Weren T , Acting , Witness , Defense Evidence , Let S Go , Shifts , Stay , Extent , The Field , Jason Chatfield , Attention , Summer , 2019 , 1st Of July , Vehicle , Boat Chewing Charters , Fishing Trip , Bridge , Exhibit , North , Image , Bluff , Google Earth , Tarps , Bunch , Trash , Tackle Box , Trail , Camp , Purse , Home , Connect , Finish , Map , Dock , South , Let , Truck , Everywhere , Road , Power Line , Highway , Highway 17 , We Couldn T , Field , Fancy Bluff Road , Rocks , 17 , Trailer , Drive , Right , Wheeler Trail , Creek , Trees , Bank , Knife , Fishing , The Bridge , Machete , Northbound Lane , Sidearm , He Wasn T , Don T Harbor , Hadn T , A Bunch Of Stuff , Equipment , Persons , Purses , Box , Odd , Nonemergency , Page , Contact Number , Address , Priscilla Drive , 912 , 1726 , 217 , 2 , Son , Automobile Break Ins , Bluff Creek Bridge , Anyone , Finding , Sorts , Fella , Him Randy Park , Suspect , Bluff Bridge , Facebook , Neighborhood Page , Forward , Mother , Thefts , 220 , Diego Perez , 11 , February 11th , Property , Camper , Backyard , There , Understanding , She Wasn T Living In The House , Owner , Residence , Stolen Goods , Land , Victim , Steal , Pistol , Januar , Ida , January 1st , On The Road , 9 , Door , Somewhere , 1145 , Conclusion , County Police Department , 230 , Missing , Rittenhouse Trial Break , Floor , Capitol Hill , Hearing , Representative , Committee Assignments , Gaucher Century , Aoc , Killing , World , Him , Alexandria , Ocasio Cortez , Lady , Indiana , Balance , Legislation , Madam Speaker , Minority Leader , Power , Abuse , Open Secret , United States House Of Representatives , Rule , Many , Radicalism , Incompetence , Chaos , Inflation , Supply Chain , Grass Prices , Border , Labor Shortage , Education System , Surrender , Afghanistan , Humiliating , Millions , History , Americans , Needs , Standard , Time , Dissidents , Agenda , Deck , Members , Minorities , Committees , Voting , Proxy Voting , Impeachment , Choosing , Speaker , Burning Down The House , Standards , Caucus , Democratic Charwoman , Streets , Issue , Comments , Trial Judge , Appeal , Chairwoman , Restaurant , Rally , Cabinet , Los Angeles , Gasoline Station , Department Store , Comment , Constituents , Trump , Health Ethics Committee , Aisle , Apology , Real Culmination Of Speaker Pelosi , Issues , It S , Leader Hoyer , High Standard , Dr , King S Civil Rights Movement , Minneapolis , Special Counsel , Dossiers , Principal , Durham , Campaign , Dossier , Infringement , Spying , Due Process , 32 Million , 2 Million , Chairman , Working Taxpayers For A Mueller Investigation , No One , Personalities , Top , Words , Strike , Agent , Intelligence Committee , Chinese Communist Party , Pattern , Congresswoman , Israel , Benjamins , 9 11 , Leadership , Attempt , Key , Lock Up , Sentiment , Failure , Won T , Nation , Violence Begets , Institution , Care , Decorum , Decency , Minority , Punishment , Watching , Need , Minority Rights , Majority , Positions , Is , Partisan , Self , Legacy , Career , Mistake , Gentleman , Chair , Jo Cortez , China , Florida , 5 , Amounts , Party , Leaders , House Leadership , Remarks , Incitement , Depiction , Venture Off , Gas Prices , Leader , Illusion , Meaning , Joke , Nihilism , Lack , Contempt , Doesn T , Matter , Chamber , Example , Doesn T Matter , Depictions , Service , Colleagues , Independence , Trickles , Party Identity , Belief , Core , Recognition , Human Dignity , Worth , Misogyny , Racist Misogyny , Results , Trend , Participation , City Council , Church , Litany , Dissent , Capital , Transgression , Awe , Little Girl , Gravity , Reverence , Children , Human Dignity Matters , Charming , Q , Activist , Stomach , Car , Acts , Feel , Choices , Committee Process , Ethics , Floor Mount , Debate , House Ethics Committee , Committee Members , Conversations , Ethics Committee Process , Reality , Claims , Emergency Committee Meeting Last Night , Kevin Mccarthy , Dems , Center Back , Travis Mcmichael One , Charlie Rangel , 2010 , Handgun , Recording , Operator , 911 , Clients , Pocket , Act , Ed , Boat Equipment , Ones , Stills , Trucks , Spill , Conversation , Recess , Continuation , Rights , February 23rd , Traffic Mcmichael , In The House Floor , Afternoon , Shooter , Ph , Deal , Person , Second , Bottom Line , Mouthful , Spending Bill , Amnesty , Tens Of Thousands Illegal Aliens , 9 Trillion , 4 9 Trillion , 100 Billion , 00 Billion , Immigration , Suffering , Left , Plague , Will I Millions Of Illegal Aliens Trucks , Cartoon , Human Traffickers , Being , Dead Of Night , Led , I Will T Against Amnesty For Illegal Aliens , Tries , Rule Of Law , Author , Madame Speaker , Manno Speaker , 3 , Pleasure , Colleague , Test , Shoulder , Galley , Speakers , 3 Million , Center , Isle , Jumping , Trials , Provocateur , Affair , Shooting , Defense Argument , One Arbery , Turn , Lives , Claim , Law Enforcemen , Journey Don T Jury , Thel , Mindse , Self Defense , Witnesses , Calling , On The House Floor , Value , Martha Maccallum , Don T Go Away , 100 , Cash , More , Grandkids , Kitchen , 0000 , 60000 , Liberty Mutual , Limu , Bogeys , Helicopter , Car Insurance , Woooooooooooooo , Learning , Faith , Character , Liberty , Hard Work , Pay , Freedom , Principles , Essential , Hillsdale College , Purposes , God , Mom , Short Ribs , Starters , Instacart , Franchising Everything , Ingredients , Sound Engineer , Record Label , Indeed Instant Match , Candidates , Taking Off , Job Description , Visit , Newday , Mortgage Rates , Va Mortgage Rate , Newday Usa , Lowest , Apr , Refi , 2 48 , Martha , Stories , File ,