good afternoon, garrett. >> gillian, good afternoon. after more than 27 hours of deliberation, this jury of six men and six women reached a verdict founding kim potter guilty of first degree and second degree manslaughter. we got notes from the pool reporter. they noted one of the jurors as the verdict was read was visibly emotional, crying and shaking as this process played out. clearly emotional. that stood in contrast to kim potter herself who showed very little emotion as that verdict was read, especially compared to friday as she gave the emotional testimony. after the judge dismissed the court, kim potter's husband and her two sons were there in the courtroom. her husband could be heard yelling to her "i love you." she yelled back "i love you." sentencing in february. the maximum sentence is 15 years for first degree manslaughter, ten years nor second degree manslaughter. we're told it's most likely -- it's up to the discretion of the judge but most likely that she would allow the sentences to be served concurrently rather than consecutively. the standard sentencing is for seven years for first degree manslaughter. prosecutors have said that they're going to be seeking enhanced sentening and providing that information ahead of the hearing. we're expecting to hear from the attorney general's office here in the next 30 to 40 minutes. we'll be holding a press conference. a short time ago, we got a statement from attorney benjamin crump representing the family of duante wright. the family of duante wright is relieved the justice system provided some measure for the accountability offer that son, brother and friend. this community that has been anxiously awaiting this verdict, a crowd of a couple dozen folks gathered here outside the courthouse. as that verdict came in erupted into cheers. they've been celebrating ever since that decision came down. they found kim potter guilty of first degree and second degree manslaughter. it's still going on behind us now. gillian? >> garrett tenney in minneapolis. i want to bring in mercedes colwin. fox news legal analyst. joined by ted williams, former d.c. homicide detective and a criminal and civil trial attorney. he's represented police officers, judges and politicians over the course of his career. thanks to you both. ted, let's start with you. give me your thoughts on this verdict. >> well, i got to tell you, the first thing i believe is that an officer of the court, lawyer, that we always should respect the decision of a jury. but when i look at this case, i have to as an individual ask, did they get this case right? what we found here was officer potter, yes a 26-year veteran, but the question is, was she actually acting recklessly? that would be count one. for count two, was she culpably negligent? where there was this unreasonable risk of harm that caused the death, great bodily harm to duante wright. those were question marks that i had in my mind. i am deeply concerned about this verdict and wondering if there was some residue from the case in minneapolis, minnesota of george floyd that was piled on here in the case of officer potter. >> so ted, you think the jury got it wrong in this case? >> i believe that they did. i respect their decision. i do believe that they did. look -- >> okay. hold your thoughts a second, ted. i'll loop back. i want to get mercedes in here. there's this extraordinary moment in the courtroom just now where we saw the defense ask judge chu to essentially release kim potter, now a convicted criminal, found criminally culpable for the young man to be released on bail. have you ever seen anything like that before? >> the defense attorneys usually tried to do that. the judge made the right call. saying this is consistent with my prior rulings when there's convictions for manslaughter, there's no bail that is granted and the individual gets remanneded to jail. even though they did articulate for profound reasons, it's christmas, she's a roman catholic, she practices that faith. she would presumably be with her family. didn't prevail with the judge and the judge was consistent with the prior ruling. >> what does this spell for the future of the police force? what are the implications of this verdict for prosecutions of police officers down the line? >> well, i don't know if it will affect police officers down the line. i think that police officers are always in a position where they have to make split second decisions. they hope and pray that they make the right decisions. here you have officer potter, training, a rookie black police officer, by the way, and the police officer took mr. wright in to custody. he should have moved him to the back of the vehicle. he didn't. officer potter made the move she made. she says that she thought she was drawing her taser when in fact she drew the gun. let me tell you this quickly. as a police officer, i've had a robber to try to shoot and kill me. i had to make a split second decision in drawing my gun and unloading the gun. i didn't give a damn how many shots i fired. i wanted to protect myself under those circumstances. here i thank officer potter wanted to protect her partner in this case is. it is unfortunate that a man died. i got to just say one more thing. i'm deeply disturbed by a defense attorney that puts a young man on trial and says that he, duante wright, was responsible for his death. i think that that is also something that the jury could very well have taken in to consideration here. that's a no-no as far as i'm concerned as a lawyer, to put someone on -- and say that this young man that died was responsible for his death. and the jury heard that. >> reasonable people can agree that that is a deeply offensive statements for a whole host of reasons. mercedes, ted laid out this scenario, this was is not just a faulty split second decision made by kim potter herself. there was a series of faulty split second decisions made on the ground in real time that ended up in duante wright being fatally shot. why is kim potter the only person being held responsible here? >> great question. part of it is because she's the shooter. she was the one that made the grave mistake. there's a life lost. this is really what it boils down to, a life was lost. didn't matter hough effective officer potter was on the stand. she was effective. we saw her break down. she was authentic, reliving the moments of april 11th. she knew she made a tragic horrible mistake and resulted in the death of a young man. a jury couldn't give her a pass. couldn't do it. she was the shooter. it wasn't her rookie partner that, by the way, the rookie partner, the evidence that came in to trial is the one that wanted to stop dwayne wright for the infraction. we're talking about an air freshener on the rear view mirror. officer potter didn't want to pull him over. she's training the officer. she does this and pulls him over as a result. they both do. unfortunately she made this terrible, horrible tragic mistake and resulted in a loss of life. >> ted, potter, when she took the stand was asked about her training, the use of the taser and what she thought was the use of a taser during that fatal interaction. want to play this clip for you. it's an astonishing moment from the trial and get your reaction on the other side. here she is talking about never having used a taser in real life. >> did you ever use a daysner your career as a law enforcement officer? >> i would take it out but i don't believe i ever deployed it. >> how is an active duty police officer sent out on the streets of america with a weapon in their possession that they have never used before? is that shocking to you? >> well, it's not shocking. but the fact about it is it shows that this woman, potter, could very well have been an excellent and good police officer where she was never put in that kind of a position. what we do know is that she had 26 years on the force, that she had an exemplary record. she was not someone that was out there, that was known to be using excessive force. as a matter of fact, she never used any force. all of that had to have been taken into consideration. that is also why as part of this, i believe that she would have not been found guilty in this case. not only because of that record, but because she was training this young officer. she did not mean -- i think what happened here, gillian, when they got in the jury room and they weighed that taser versus that gun, they found that maybe it was somewhat unreasonable for her to believe that she was actually pulling a taser when in fact she pulled the gun. >> ted and mercedes, have to leave it there. thanks for joining us. we appreciate it. want to bring in by phone judge jeanine pirro. she's the host of "judge with jeanine." did the jury get this verdict right? judge, can you hear us? we have some audio issues with the judge there. oh, judge, can you hear me? >> yes, i can. >> gillian: hi, this is gillian. i want to hear your thoughts on the verdict. you think the jury got this right? >> you know, it's very interesting. i listened to you're than turley and i listened to ted williams. i must tell you, i was stunned at the verdict. it is a kind of verdict that, you know, none of us really expected, especially manslaughter in the first degree. this woman clearly didn't intend to cause any harm to duante wright. but we know what the law is and the law talks about recklessness and culpable negligence. she was negligent. no doubt about it. but this case like a lot of cases, the shock that she displayed at the time right after she realized she shot him and even before when she says taser, taser, taser indicates that her mind is not connecting with what she's doing. i think in the four corners of a courtroom, when the jury looks at the difference between a taser and a real gun, they will say how can she get the two mixed up? legally based on the law, the decision was correct based on the four corners of what was going on in the courtroom. now, of course -- go ahead. >> gillian: i was going to say, kim potter as you pointed out showed a lot of incredible remorse, amount of remorse on the stand. she reportedly showed remorse on the scene in real time after she shot duante wright, too. what were they instructed about that? >> you know, i don't know what the judge instructed. i know as a judge myself, i would tell them that you cannot in any way, shape or form worry about what the sentence is going to be. that is for me to determine and not for you to worry about. basically saying to them, don't worry about the consequences or the result of what you're going to be doing. so i'm sure that's what they heard and they took that in to the deliberation room. this is a very, very unique case. it's very consistent with what we're seeing in courtrooms across the country. we have a group of americans that are not listening to these half-witted politicians that are deciding the cases based on the facts. this case was based on the facts and the law as presented to them. however, they could have based -- made a different decision given what she said before she even shot him, which was "taser, taser, taser." she was obviously nervous and inexperienced no matter how many years she had under her belt. >> gillian: now that we know which way the chips have fallen in the case, do you think in hindsight it was a mistake maybe for the defense to bring her to the stand? like if you were advising them and we were going back in time, maybe you'd keep her off the stand? >> no, no. no. she was an incredible witness. she needed to say her peace. she did it remarkably well. she did it in a way where she connected with everyone. there was a juror in tears. i've had many jurors in tears. it's very emotional after they make a decision as weighty as these are. she couldn't have done any better. however the law was instructed to them by the judge and they're taking it seriously, they're facing a holiday -- i hoped they came back with a hung jury or that can they come back monday. this is the holidays. what relatives are coming in, what the reaction will be. you know, let's put that aside. but it didn't happen that way and we respect the verdict, respect the jury. i think they could have come back on the man 2 instead of the man 1. now the issue is the judge. you know, i don't know what kind of judge she is. will she sentence her to the max. i don't know. this is a woman that has never been accused of any wrongdoing, committing any kind of excessive force. i'm sure if you want to her personnel file, there's nothing in there. but the mitigating factor is that this is clearly a mistake. they didn't think about it. you talk about alec baldwin. a month later after the shooting of hutchins, oh, it wasn't my fault. this is immediate. this is spontaneous. this is considered incredibly trustworthy when it happens at the moment. so we'll see what the sentence will be. >> gillian: we'll see. judge, thanks for taking time out of the day for us. we appreciate it. talk to you soon. >> thank you. bye-bye. >> gillian: so joining us now is jonathan turley, constitutional attorney and fox news contributor. jonathan, i want to pick up with you where jury pirro left off. kind of an interesting question, right? how is it that kim potter will spend christmas behind bars and alec baldwin is not? >> well, there are differences obviously in the case. baldwin did believe that he had a harmless weapon in his hand, a prop. i said in previous columns that i think he faces considerable civil liability. criminal labelty is not likely unless he is held for negligence in his role as a producer. the jury may have gotten the law right. the question is whether the law itself is wrong. you know, this is a criminalization of a negligent act on a highly ambiguous standard. the judge tried. i think she did a great job in explaining to the jury how it had to reach a decision. but in the end, it was just cloaked in ambiguity. the jury was originally a hung injury. they went to the court because they didn't feel that they could reach a conclusion. they only reached a conclusion with the prodding of the court. the question that follows this case is whether the law itself needs to be examined. i have an opinion -- i'm sorry. a column coming on "usa today" on that. minnesota needs to look at whether this -- whether these types of weapon confusion cases should be held -- handled as criminal matters or whether this standard should be clarified. if it is changed, by the way, there could be a request for clemency from the governor if that change would have benefitted officer potter. the reason that all of us were all over the board on this is we were all dealing with a standard that could be anything. half the people were talking as if simple negligence would do it. the other half seemed to be requiring an intentional act. that is a problem with the law. >> so to get in to that a little bit deeper as i understand it, the prosecution didn't need to establish intent for these charges, man 1 or man 2. based on what the judge told me, sounds like the jury probably was not supposed to take into account the remorse that kim potter showed on the stand or the remorse that she reportedly showed that day in april on the scene after she shot duante wright. does that -- is that part of the equation that needs adjusting in your mind? >> part of the reason a hung jury would have been a benefit is that she could have had a different defense. i was very critical of the defense and the prosecution in the case. i didn't feel this was the strongest defense that was put on. remorse itself is not a factor, an element to this crime. but what you saw immediately after the shooting was shock. it was an officer that was in disbelief as to what occurred. that is relevant. i think the jury understood that it was not an intentional act. if it's not intentional, how can you say it was a conscious disregard of the home? that's what everyone gets stuck on. >> gillian: so what do you you think? if you're a judge in this case, how should you approach her sentencing here? >> i'm not familiar with this judge's sentencing history. i think she's been a very fine judge in this trial. she's been really the gold standard. you do have someone that will be facing an aggravating factor called for sentencing because she was using her official authority as a law enforcement officer that aggravates your sentence. there's mitigating factors. she doesn't have a record. she's shown remorse. close ties in service to her community. i would be surprised if the court went to the top of that 15-year range. usually -- >> gillian: what is the max, the ceiling. >> yeah. usually you would see something towards the middle, this is a police officer. you might see a year tacked on, even two. but the justice -- the judge now has to to justice in the sentencing. doing justice means that you're not any longer looking at guilt but weighing all of the factors, including defendant's remorse and coming up with something that does real justice for everyone. for the wright family, this brings closure, brings an important element of justice. now the court has to look at all sides in the totality of these circumstances. reach a sentence that is fair and wright and just. >> gillian: all right, jonathan. stand by, if you will, for a minute. i'm going to take us live to the attorney general of minute minute, keith ellison is speaking in the wake of the verdict. we're going to listen in. >> he was proud of his son, duante jr. we know he loved his mom and he loved his dad and he loved his siblings. his big, beautiful family. he had his whole life in front of him. he could have become anyone. all of us miss out on who duante could have been. no one has missed him more than his parents, katie and aubrey. and their children. i'm very mindful today that there will be an empty chair at the wright family dinner during the holidays. that saddens me. once again, i extend my deepest condolences to you. with the jury finding kimberly potter guilty today of manslaughter in the first degree and man slaughter in the second degree in connection with duante's death, we have a degree of accountability for duante's death. a count ability is not justice. justice is restoration. justice would be restoring him to life and making the wright family whole again. justice is beyond the reach that we have in this life for duante. accountability is an important step. critical necessary step on the rode to justice for us all. i want to thank the jury for their careful attention and deliberation and for their service to the people of minnesota. i want to thank the witnesses that testified and came forward with what they knew about this case. i especially want to thank my remarkable team. when i took this case, i said it would be difficult to prosecute because history has shown that trying cases like this one is difficult. this team did not shy away from the challenge. from the people of hennepin county and the american people and the people of minnesota. what they saw in the courtroom was the fruit of many, many hours of labor and hard work and planning is. from my office, i want to thank specifically mr. matthew frank. i want to thank a aaron eldridge. this team wouldn't be much of anything if it were not for the amazing work of joshua larson, vernona boswell. i also want to thank colleagues that didn't work on the legal matter but worked in the community. that is john styles and everyone. thanks for your hard work. i want to thank the many staff at the bureau of criminal apprehension that worked on this case. the staff of the hennepin county attorney's office and washington county attorney's office. specifically i want to thank mr. drew evans and those that was the in this case like agent phil that did a fine job and put many in long hours. we appreciate their service. the next step in this case is sentencing. all i will say about that today is that we have to look forward to the court setting a calendar date for that hearing and at that time we will make our appropriate arguments within the context of the court hearing. we have a date, do we not? >> gillian: you're listening live to the direct attorney in minneapolis speaking in the conviction of kim potter in the trial of duante wright. i want to bring in jonathan turley, fox news contributor. what the attorney general will is saying underscores a point that you made, which at least for the wright family, this brings a clear sense of justice in this case. now they're looking to sentencing. >> it also supports what the judge was saying when she rejected the defense request that potter not be put in to immediate custody. not only is that not the standard procedure for cases, but it also ignores that there was a loss of life on the other side. there is an empty chair during the holidays. the court did not want to appear that it had a special standard for officers. that is a difficult decision. the real question here going forward is how we handle these weapon confusion cases. i've been writing about these cases for almost two decades. they leave more questions than they answer. many of these cases, it is undeniable that the officers thought that they were using a taser. the question that i think the public in minnesota and other states have to grapple with, do we feel this should be handled in the criminal justice system as 0 posed through the civil system through torts. >> do you think a solution or some degree of ameliorating sort of context here live in statute or does it lie with police departments who bear significant responsibility to train their officers in the use of these weapons? she on the stand said, we played the clip a few moments ago. she said i never fired my taser before. to me, a lay person, that was very shocking to hear. >> there is a considerable responsibility for police departments and there will be civil litigation in all of these cases. keep in mind, we have a handful of weapons confusion cases. you consider there's tens of thousands of taser cases for deployment. so this remains rare. that also begs the question, by criminalizing these mistakes, are you going to make them less likely? these are officers that didn't do a calculus of risk. they mistook a weapon in a blink of time. the fact that that can be acted as a criminal matter won't weigh-in on that decision. so again, the question is do we have civil liability, termination of a police officer's position and of course, the desire of all police officers not to take a life without legitimate cause. that's a debate worth having. it doesn't belittle what about to mr. right and doesn't mean this is a wrong conclusion for the jury. they followed the law. the question is this the law that we want to have in terms of a standard or do we want to be more clear when it should be a criminal rather than civil matter. >> gillian: a debate worth having. thanks, jonathan. >> thank you. >> gillian: so as garrett tenney reports, there were audible cheers outside the courtroom when the guilty verdict was red out loud. take a listen to that moment. [cheering]. there's still a few people gathered outside the courtroom in minneapolis. emotions were high inside the courtroom as well. both of duante wright's family members were there. they cried as the verdict was read as understandable. they know that kim potter's husband said "i love you, kim." a lot of emotions running throughout this case. i want to bring in attorney brian claypool. what do you make of this verdict and the response we're seeing so far? >> gillian, thanks for having me back. we talked yesterday about this. i commented to you that that question by the jury about wanting to handle that gun, i thought that they favored the prosecution. why? ted williams mentioned this as well. it's difficult for a judge to grasp how kim potter would not know the difference between a taser and a gun. the taser weighs 50% less than a gun. that was a big game changer yesterday. at the end of the day, it's not surprised by the guilty verdict on the second degree manslaughter. a little surprised by the guilty on the first degree manslaughter. guess what? the jury sent a message to the entire country that they felt -- i looked back at the language in the first degree manslaughter. gillian, it says the jury found that mrs. potter used such force and violence that death was reasonably foreseeable. that's what this jury found. that is a massive message to the country and to police practices across this country. that if you make a mistake in a nonsplit second decision, you're going to have to suffer criminal consequences. this jury really didn't believe that there was confusion involved. they felt like what kim potter did was so grossly dangerous to duante wright -- remember a young man like the prosecution did a good job with this, this is a young man that gets pulled over for expired tags. he's not armed. he's not making any threats. he's not assaulting anybody. he gets shot. that is not the standard of police practices that we need in this country, gillian. that's what this jury is saying. we get it. she's sorry. she connected with the jury. guess what? connecting with the jury is not enough. you take a badge, you serve 26 years on the force, you have to do a better job. that's what the jury said today. >> gillian: at the heart of the prosecution's argument at this trial has been essentially to say that she was a highly trained officer. she was trained in -- she's been handling weapons a long time as part of her service. when she said on the stand she never fired the taser gun before, it surprised at least me the idea that the police officer department would send an officer out on the streets to interact with civilians and have access to a weapon on their person that they never had even used before, never even in a simulation kind of a circumstance. does that surprise you? >> that is a great point, gillian. goes a step further. do you remember when she was questioned on cross exam? remember when she was asked also, do you recall being trained for long form use of a dayser? that is important in this case. if she thought she had a taser, she could have shot from further away. she said i don't remember. i don't recall being trained on that. she came off very disconnected in terms of her training, her level of experience. how do you not know that? that is important. yes, i was trained on this and i know how to use a taser. you never used a taser? bigger than that, gillian, this jury really -- i think they viewed this entire encounter from the totality of the circumstance. what do i mean by that? this was like a social experiment. think about it. kim potter is in that car. she's trying to train somebody. oh, i wouldn't even pull this car over but we're going to pull him over. like ted williams said, you and i talked about this yesterday. how does duante wright get pulled out of the car and supposed to be handcuffed, how does he get back in to the car? this was like a bad news bears scenario. kim potter is in charge. don't use a human being whose life is gone now to train officers on the job. should have been handled better and has to be consequences. one quick point on jonathan turley's point. i love him to death but i disagree on the criminal versus civil. when you see police officers in civil court, they're guaranteed qualified immunity. in this civil case against kim potter, she might get off on qualified immunity. so if you want to change the criminal laws to civil, you better start changing and removing the qualify immunity civil protections as well. police officers are not usually held accountable in civil court. >> gillian: we have to leave it there. thanks for taking time this afternoon. we appreciate it. >> you bet. thanks. >> gillian: we're going to continue monitoring this breaking situation out of minnesota. the white house is going to speak. the president will speak soon. we're anticipating perhaps a reaction to the jury's decision. the president is going to weigh-in after being pressed again on serving crime rates across u.s. cities. we have victor davis hanson on tap to talk about the president's strategy going forward. >> is the president taking crime in big cities more seriously now that a democratic member of congress has been carjacked at gun point? feel stuck with student loan debt? move to sofi and feel what it's like to get your money right. ♪ ♪ move your student loan debt to sofi— you could save with low rates and no fees. earn a $1,000 bonus when you refi— and get your money right. ♪ is now a good time for a flare-up? enough, crohn's! for adults with moderate to severe crohn's or ulcerative colitis, stelara® can provide relief, and is the first approved medication to reduce inflammation on and below the surface of the intestine in uc. you, getting on that flight? back off, uc! stelara® may increase your risk of infections, some serious, and cancer. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection, flu-like symptoms, sores, new skin growths, have had cancer, or if you need a vaccine. pres, a rare, potentially fatal brain condition, may be possible. some serious allergic reactions and lung inflammation can occur. lasting remission can start with stelara®. janssen can help you explore cost support options. is struggling to manage your type 2 diabetes janssen can help you explore knocking you out of your zone? lowering your a1c with once-weekly ozempic® can help you get back in it. oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! my zone... lowering my a1c, cv risk, and losing some weight... now, back to the game! ozempic® is proven to lower a1c. most people who took ozempic® reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. and you may lose weight. adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. in adults also with known heart disease, ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. ozempic® helped me get back in my type 2 diabetes zone. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. looking to get back in your type 2 diabetes zone? ask your health care provider today about once-weekly ozempic®. oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! you may pay as little as $25 for a 3-month prescription. >> gillian: the mother of the alleged michigan high school shooter is trying to explain now a message that she sent to her son on the day he killed four fellow students. a lawyer for jennifer crumbley that said "ethan, don't do it." after the shooting she begged him not to kill himself. ethan's parents are in jail. they stand charged with involuntary manslaughter. the prosecutor says that they bought the 15-year-old a gun and met with him about his violent drawings the morning of the shooting but refused to take him home after the school ordereded them to do so. he's been a charged with kills four teens and injuring seven others. just in the past 48 hours now, two lawmakers have been carjacked and held at gun point. one of them is a congress woman out of pennsylvania, the other an illinois state senator. the white house reacting this way just a few moments ago. listen. >> if the president is giving big cities historic levels of funding and members of congress are going home and getting carjacked at gun point, what else can the president do or what else is the president going to do to keep people safe? >> this is a priority for the president. i want to be clear this proposal for additional funding for the cops program is something that the president proposed several months ago. the president has never supported defunding the police. he's always been an advocate for funding. >> gillian: first, alexis mcadams. hi, alexa. >> hi, gillian, this is shocking here. not shocking for the cities where it happened in. the crime rates there keep surging. as you mentioned within 24 hours, two elected democrat as cross the nation were carjacked. one happened outside of chicago and the other happened in philadelphia, this is the congresswoman that was held at gun point. her car taken here in philadelphia and that area turning into a crime scene there. mary scanlon carjacked. two men held her at gun point, tuck her purse, phone, keys and her car. on the phone was government information. hours after they tracked down the s.u.v. in neighboring delaware. the five suspects taken in to delaware after a joy ride. >> if a member of congress is a criminal -- is a complainant in a crime and sensitive material that they left behind and we know was taken, the fbi around the capitol police will assist. the recovery is very important. >> tuesday kimberly lightford and her husband were kidnapped in chicago. they were held at gun point by three guys that fired several gun shots and took off in her mercedes s.u.v. although they have pushed for police reform, they're thanking the officers that responded to help. >> when i put a resolution on the floor to condemn attempts to defund, dismantle and abolish police, and both of them voted against this resolution was astanding, i hope they reconsider their position. >> no injuries reported in either carjacking cases. they're both examples of growing crime trends in major cities across the country. in philadelphia, carjacks are up 100% and 545 homicides. out here live, we've been tracking this crime data in the city of chicago. there's 20,000 carjackings in chicago alone this year and 800 murders. right now chicago's mayor is calling for federal help to help out in the windy city. crime continues to surge. for the philadelphia case, a 19-year-old that was charged and the other people weres will teenagers. gillian? >> gillian: thanks so much. let's bring in victor davis hanson from the hoover institute. let's start with this. this is now -- the crime surge is clearly a national scale, nationwide. take a look at this map. 12 cities where homicides were hitting record numbers this year coast to coast. rural areas, cities. it's happening everywhere. where is the federal government in this? where is the department of justice, for example? >> well, they're under the influence of the summer of 2020 when we have the 120 days of looting, arson, assault, murder. $2 billion in property damage. it's not justified by understandable. chris cuomo said since when is riot or protests been peaceful? so there was this sense that we have redefined crime in the heart of the inequity or lack of equity in the justice system, et cetera, et cetera. yes, all of these people were staunch defunders of the police and our political system on the left. joe biden -- they're being inexact because joe biden was not a forceful critic of defunding the police. he wanted it both ways in the campaign of 2020. the left has been sort of -- their trademark is not to be subject to the consequences of their own ideologies. so you can have mark zuckerberg or bill gates or nancy pelosi with a wall around their estates. and then they think walls don't work on the border. or the silicon valley people can say, you know, we don't like charter schools but we put our kids in prep school. crime is a different matter. without safety and security, you have no civilization. crime is much more indiscriminate. people that defund the police, whether you have a mercedes or an acura, it doesn't matter. doesn't matter what zip code you're in. once you lose deterrence, deterrence is that the criminal makes a cost benefit analysis. when they decide it's beneficial to commit a crime without punishment, crime increases. it's indiscriminate. >> gillian: i want to pick up on a thread there. so until very recently like last week, the biden administration was delegating solutions to the crime crisis to cities and states saying these are problems in your locals. you take it away from here. they might be now kind of stepping up to the plate a little bit more this week. is it too late to stem the tide? >> yeah, i think it is too late. the reason that they're a little more concerned, what has happened in the last month, you're having smash and grab. they're not in a middle class suburb shopping center. they are at nordstrom, walnut creek, carmel by the sea. we've had murders of people not in fresno or stockton, california but beverly hills. >> gillian: wealthy areas. >> yes. pacific palisades. bulletproof cars and safe rooms. the wealthy and the influential on the left feel that their virtual signalling is not working and making it known. it's not the inner city anymore, the lower middle classes suffering from this crime wave that was enabled by defunding the police. so of course, the biden administration is getting calls from big donors and saying listen, i live in beverly hills, i live in pacific palisades, i'm an actor, a congresswoman. i never thought this would affect me. when you lose deterrence, things happen. the language matters. i was listening to the carjacking described as a joy ride. when you put a gun to somebody and you steal their car and their valuables and you get in it and you drive off, that is not a joy ride. i'm sorry. >> gillian: victor, we have to leave it there. >> that's important. when the attorney -- >> gillian: we're heading -- >> i understand the tragedy involved, but duante wright was a convicted felon with a record of putting a gun to a young woman's head and robber her among other things. he was pulled over because -- i've been pulled over for not having insurance tags. if i had no violent license and no proof of insurance and a warrant out for my a rest and lengthy felony record and i resisted arrest, i think i might run into a panicked officer. i'm not justifying what happened. but this idea that we're going to contextualize everything in one direction in a political way, all of these trials and these incidents are becoming iconic politically. >> gillian: victor, we're coming up against a hard break now. the biden administration is making risky moves in afghanistan that could end up legitimizing or even contributing funding to taliban leaders. we'll break that dunn with congressman mike waltz next. on us, when you trade in your old or damaged phone. (kate) better? (guy) better. (kate) hey. (kate) and up to $1,000 when you switch. (carolers) ♪better♪ (kate) because everyone deserves better. people with moderate to severe psoriasis, or psoriatic arthritis, are rethinking the choices they make like the splash they create the way they exaggerate the surprises they initiate. otezla. it's a choice you can make. otezla is not an injection or a cream it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you. as i observe investors balance risk and reward, i see one element securing portfolios, time after time. gold. your strategic advantage. fine, no one leaves the table until your finished. fine, we'll sleep here. ♪♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft. for the win win. >> gillian: nearly four months out now after the u.s. withdrawal from afghanistan. the biden administration is easing sanctions this week as the afghan people struggle with severe drought and famine. this is raising concerns among experts against giving legitimacy to the taliban government. trey yingst joins us from jerusalem with the latest. hi, trace. >> gillian, good afternoon. the biden administration is easing sanctions on taliban controlled afghanistan. the announcement came from the treasury department and details three new general licenses that will allow organizations to sent more aid to the country. notably two of the permits will allow them to engage with the haqqani network. >> these authorizations issued in september and consistent with the resolution adopted by the u.n. security council that established a carve out for human assistance to ensure urgently needed aid can reach the afghan people. >> $9 billion worth of afghan assets were frozen by the united states and other countries after the taliban took over. now the economy is spiralling downward. 50% of the population is facing extreme hunger. these developments come as reports indicate the united nations is considering paying the taliban $6 million a year for security. this highlights the difficulty that countries and organizations will face in the coming months and years as they try to work in a country controlled by extremists. gillian? >> gillian: thanks, trey. we appreciate it. breaking today, the white house was pressed about criticism of the president's promise to provide 500 million free at home rapid covid tests to any american that wants them. listen. >> why is it that you guys are promising 500 million tests next month when you haven't even signed a contract to buy them? >> we have no concern about the contract being finalized. we just announced this. there's no -- we don't see any issue or have any halt in getting that done. >> dr. marty makary is a fox news medical contributor. doctor, is 500 million tests too little too late? whether we get them tomorrow or next month, there's a shortage here. there's been a shortage for two years. >> yes. if we want to do a universal testing policy to do every setting for screening, including people that don't think that they were exposed for the holidays, which is what the white house has been recommending, you need two to three billion test a week. they're susguesting a month's supply. we have to move from universal testing and moving to selective testing for those that won't make a behavior change. >> gillian: when you say universal testing, testing everybody when they come to work. even if they're asymptomatic. that is wasteful? >> that's right. that's screening. we can't do that with the limited supply we've got. >> gillian: what do you think about forcing young, healthy, low risk students to get this third round of shot of vaccine booster? i know you have strong opinions. >> yeah, i had a piece in yesterday's "wall street journal." there will be unintended harm from a blanket booster requirement from colleges and universities, a study came out of israel published in the new england journal that showed that people under the age of 30 that got their primary vaccine, nobody died of covid subsequentsly. we know there's complications of myocarditis as high as 1 in 7,000. that's with the boosters were voted down in healthy people a few months ago until they were bypassed. >> gillian: have to leave it there. thanks for joining us today. that does it for us, "the story" on december, 23. thanks for joining us. "your world" starts right now. >> neil: guilty on both counts. kim potter found guilty of first degree manslaughter for the reckless use of a firearm and second degree manslaughter, all of this in the fatal april shooting death of duante wright in brooklyn center, minnesota. the fallout from the results a few saw coming. welcome. i'm neil cavuto. this is "your world." making sense out of a jury's decision that nows that the culprit in