subjecting her position in school, that she flunked out of college, which is not true. she graduated from an hbcu but what has been leaked is the fact she flunked out of school and someone other than her father moved her, the validity of which was never shown. all the while, she is facing these costs and has been able to continue to do the work unrelated to this case, which is shown in the fact that a land as murder rate and violent crime rates have decreased while she has been in office. what was shown through the testimony of all of the witnesses and the evidence that your honor heard was that there wasn't an actual conflict. the district failed -- the relationship that transpired from the relationship between her and mr. wade and there was no evidence of a financial benefit she gained as it relates to the prosecution of this case and the ultimate outcome of the case. the corroboration of all of that our things your honor is aware of. she could have financially benefited from stretching out the case, for lack of a better word by the special grand jury, we recommended the 39 individuals be indicted. her sifting through the report and all of the evidence with the team that indicted the case, they only went with 19 of the defendants, had she gone with all 39, based on the defense counsel's assertions, it would have given her the opportunity to find these financial gains. why would she repeatedly asked the court to set a trial date as soon as possible if the motive was to continue to financially gain from the prosecution of this case. it doesn't line up. it does not make sense and it does not for a reason. it does not exist. more importantly, this office has multiple and large-scale cases like this one and much larger. there are a lot of high profile prosecutions. if miss willis' ultimate goal by hiring mr. wade was for her financial benefit, she would put mr. wade on every case. so she could revel in the riches and lavish lifestyle that has been referred to by defense counsel. there has been no evidence of. the evidence if she stayed at a doubletree in napa. i don't know that to be a lavish hotel. most people, when they go to napa, they stay at the ritz-carlton, the four seasons, things of that nature, not a doubletree. the allegations that she was living the lifestyle of the rich and famous is a joke. an absolute joke. as it relates to what you heard and the secondary issue, the forensic misconduct, for lack of better words, it has to be shown the statements that were made by miss willis related to the prosecution of the case and the guilt or innocence of the defendants, we have none of those statements. there has been no evidence. nothing has been provided as it relates to the specific statements made about any of the defendants and in relation to the guilt or innocence of any of the defendants. she said she had a 95% commission rate. that was what was done which she referenced she had a 95% conviction rate in the previous year. more importantly, it has been the allegations about race and religion being imputed in her speech and those comments were directed at the defendants at this table and if you listen to the speech, they are directed at two elected or political officials. i believe it was marjorie taylor greene and bridget, who is a member of the board of commissioners here. she used their names. i don't know -- my knowledge is they are not supposed to be sitting at the table and i have not seen them in my work as it relates to this case. those allegations that she committed forensic misconduct are -- there is no validity, no evidence as it relates to any of those comments. this is an issue judge mcburney has previously ruled on when these allegations were alleged as it relates to statements made by miss willis and it involved a statement that the words fake electors were said by miss willis and he found there was no conduct that was impermissible as it relates to forensic misconduct. the drive home the point, at no point in any of the statements that you made, at no point did she mention the guilt or innocence. she was responding to comments made by marjorie taylor greene and two other political officials. what i find interesting is defense counsel wants to make these allegations that she had this tremendous misconduct by statement she made in her defense and has two unrelated to the officials, criticize the job she was doing. i find the hypocrisy interesting in the sense we have had videos released to the media, emails released to the media by defense counsel, statements have been made by the defense counsel in relation to this case. we have the unredacted version of the cell phone records released with his private and personal information, causing the threat of harm to miss willis and mr. wade to increase. the most recent instance were the text messages. you had not ruled on their admissibility and it was made clear. it was the ability to get the full chain was something as something they were not able to do and they figured out a way in the minute they figured out a way, they release the information to the media and simultaneously turned it over to the state. for all of the reason stated before, this motion should be denied. the legal requirements that are required in order for the district attorney to be disqualified have not been satisfied. the defendants have failed to raise any issue to satisfy the legal standard for disqualification as they -- political bias, which has been accusations made as well as demonstrated the prosecution was motivated by any means and anyway. they have not been able to prove this case was one of political prosecution. what i would leave the court with, how the state started this argument, courts have been unreceptive, if not hostile to disqualify prosecutors based on conflicts, which makes clear the burden of standard is high that must be met in order to be disqualified. that standard has not been met. a conflict has not been shown and more importantly, in conjunction with that, there has been no evidence the district attorney has benefited financially at all but benefited with conjunction to any outcome whether it be now or as released to the prosecution will me. we request you deny the motion to disqualify miss bonnie wi willis. -- miss fa fani willis. >> i am going to do specific rebuttal. the state makes an argument that we should have asked mr. wade questions about his relationship and communications with mr mr. bradley and the counsel objected over and over, claiming everything they were told by wade was attorney-client privilege. your honor made determinations to bradley. we did not get the opportunity to call him back to the stand. it is a false position to take, as disingenuous as it can be. we will be happy to call mr. wade back to the stand but there could be no confrontation of mr. wade when his counsel in the state are arguing it shouldn't be done. second, let's use common sense here. forensic misconduct received about 2 minutes worth of discussion. the rest is all on conflict. misconduct dealing with the state is if you don't accuse someone or you don't say someone is guilty. >> judge mcafee: assuming you can impugn someone's character to the degree it constitutes forensic misconduct, i guess the primary position was they were not talking about you at that church. >> if you listen to it and watch it, it starts off by saying why does commissioner bridget thorne and so many others and then it refers to they attack him for being black, not anyone else, just to attack the black man. they are not talking about miss the one or marjorie taylor greene. they are talking about us. everybody knows that because not a single story from the media reported anything other than fani willis accused the defendants of being racist. if you follow the definitions of misconduct, or she can say they are racist. they are racist. that would not be a problem. >> that makes no sense whatsoever. the issue is not simply the church speech, it is why she did it. how she did it. let's go to the relationship issues and the cell phone issues briefly. no one knew there was a relationship between wade and willis according to wade and willis. not a soul was told they were dating or that there was an intimate relationship ever. they concealed it from all parties. from daddy. daddy didn't even know they had a relationship. to suggest in the beginning of 2021, january, to whatever it was, into april, that they could not have met? they did not meet anywhere that would allow the public to see them. that is the reason they were meeting because nobody else was ever there. who else was there besides mr. wade and miss willis? both of them agreed no one. no one ever went there except them. they didn't go to where daddy was. daddy was there. no other prosecutors knew. no one knows except to? the one person that knew and bradley was the partner of wade. the only way that bradley can walk away -- i will skip that. let's go to motives. who has a motive that is the strongest? fani willis. if they testify truthfully on every point, what happens if the relationship started before november 1st, they get disqualified. who has the best motive of anyone to lie? they do. who has the most at stake alive? they do. >> judge mcafee: thank you. thank you, everybody. it has been made clear by the argument that there are several legal issues to sort through, several factual determinations i have to make and those are ones i can make at this moment. i will be taking the time to make sure i give this case full consideration it is due. i hope to have an answer for everyone within the next two weeks. until that point, counsel can reach out and we will have it posted on the docket. thank you. we are off the record. >> judge mcafee indicating he is going to make a decision the next couple of weeks. we know what the defense attorney is arguing on behalf that this test the credibility of fani willis and nathan wade. this was the outside attorney she appointed in november 2021 to lead this election interference investigation and then we got caught up in her affair. you might have noticed every time the defense team or representative thereof come up to their case, fani willis would not leave. they are trying to pay attention to the fact she had a pattern of lying and misstating the facts, going so far to say prosecutors don't act like this, lawyers don't act like this, these people need to go. we are following it in atlanta. the fallout from this, the judge is saying a couple of weeks, maybe sooner, maybe not. that is a long time to be waiting on this. >> the end game is not clear. for the past seven weeks, this has been the case, a case within the case, where there prosecutors have been on trial. not a lot of talk about election interference. focus on the d.a. and the man she hired, nathan wade, a case that mixes politics and inflammatory statements. it is not clear where it is going to go. the judge will take up to two weeks to think about it but it could be an appeal. fani willis did appear today and made fiery statements from the witness box, she is up for reelection. this case could be decided and then appealed and what is the final effect on fani willis? has this helped her possible reelection chances? even if she is removed, will it damaged her political future? not clear right now. >> what they have to decide, how far you can go. can he go so far as to say his whole case is blown up or she goes or doesn't go? >> he could pull her off, him off, both off, or he could pull neither off. both sides are likely to appeal. they present an organized case today and divide the territory and really attack. they make the case these two lied under oath. if they use this case to profit, to make $1 million and spend it on themselves and lie about when their relationship started, that is the part they hammered home. the state's presentation seems to be halting, sometimes stumped by the judge's questions. the state presented a coherent case and the defense really back on their heels trying to recapitulate a lot of earlier testimony. you can see fani willis was itching to take the microphone but she did not do it today. >> you are top-notch, but you are also good at examining the local community and how things are going. how are people responding to this? is it getting much traction, attention? is there great pressure on the judge? >> it is getting a lot of attention. you can see the emotions in the courtroom. the older white attorneys for the defense saying these people don't belong here. these people made us a laughing stock and they not attorneys. really a sense of scorn for what they considered two liars. on the other side, the defiance of fani willis. my daddy told me not to take money from a man. that defiance is going to be supported by many who vote for her while others might be embarrassed by the performance so far. >> we have the former assistant, if i can begin with you, we got a sense of where the defense is coming from here. we got a sense from the prosecutors in his time in their argument to go so far there is no evidence the defendants of this case they are presenting harm in any way, acknowledging you had to drag out to get there in the first place. what do you make of that? this did not move the needle or affect the case they are prosecuting? >> what does he have to apply here? you are talking about the facts? there is a case that lets you look at the appearance of conflicts. you don't actually have to have the conflict. he is going to make a decision about the cell phone records they are trying to enter into evidence, thousands of bits of information, whether that gets in or not gets in all this case. you have to get through the factual and legal issues before he makes a decision about whether it makes a disqualification here. >> it is one thing to say you have to go. this is just a plural above behavior, it makes everybody look bad. or can you go further than that, this case is exploding. we start from scratch. what are his ground rules for himself. >> the issue is a motion to disqualify. it is not a motion to dismiss but the decision he makes could have collateral impact. if he is to find forensic misconduct such as perjury or lack of candor to the court, would that impact every other indictment the district attorney signed in the accounting and that is an astronomical thought to have in terms of what damage control is around. it is very complex but for the purpose of what he is deciding in this motion in this order, it will be a determination of where they qualify in this order. >> let's say she was dismissed. bottom line, she is gone, nathan wade is gone, but the trial continues. do they have grounds to say this started out as a circus and we are not sure it is going to resume any less? >> a big question would be, is it just fani willis and nathan wade who would be out of the case or is it the entire district attorney's office. this has been an issue through these proceedings. there may have been a couple of different ways you could have handled this. the way the d.a.'s office decided to handle it was to jump in with both feet as the advocate for speed to add nathan wade and it seems to me they have attached themselves at the hip to their principles and maybe that was the way the boss wanted it but it is hard for me to believe the way this was conducted that you could potentially disqualify one or both of wade and willis and not disqualify the office. the office will go if willis has to be disqualified. the other thing, i would think about, the practical effect of this. we look like we have a four to six week trial in connection with the case, the manhattan d.a. case and in south florida, they have an argument over when they are going to schedule the documents case where they have a window because of the complications of the washington case. there is no trial date on the horizon. you are running out of days on the calendar. >> another thing is the timeline on this relationship and more, parties who might or might not have been aware of that and now are. with the timeline, this is more involved than i thought. if you can respond to this series of timeline bites. >> how does the timing impact financial interests? >> they know if they find it started in 2019 that the appointment of wade was imp improper. he did not have approval from fulton county to appoint him in the first place. that undermines the indictment. that is what they were worried about. it is how the money ended up going back to her. she put her boyfriend in the spot, paid him, reaped the benefits. >> it started earlier than assumed and the timeline sounds worse for the prosecution and we believed. >> what willis and wade said no, it did not start earlier and it only happened after he had been assessed and hired to do the specific work as a contractor. we have the old friend of fani willis and terrence bradley, who used to be a law partner of nathan wade, both saying they started earlier. when he was put on the stand, she said, did it start earlier and he said absolutely and he went on to offer details about when and where the timeline of the relationship but when he got on the stand, it was i don't recall, i was speculating, much less definitive information. he has to make an assessment based on what he has heard and what he believes is truthful about it. >> i get the sense of they had a relationship, it might have gone on earlier than we might have acknowledged or thought, but what difference does it make? the relationship never got in the way, nothing in the presentation deferred from that. what do you think of that? >> the issue with the relationship is not that there was a relationship. it started arising when there were lies being told about when it began and the judge has circumstantial evidence based on the testimony of both who are close with these individuals that the relationship was going on that it began earlier. that was never disclosed and had it been, it presented a conflict of interest because of the financial gain from having the romantic partner in that role. nevertheless, it has been exacerbated by the lies. the question is, whether they can close the loop and determined there is a conflict. that is only one ground upon which she could be disqualified. there are other issues that would not require the judge find they perjure themselves and find they could be disqualified. >> when i am looking at who said what and when, donald trump's lawyers are saying they were playing the race card, that they were being attacked based on their race. it potentially got in the way of something they were debating in that courthouse going after donald trump, that she played the race card and the -- card at once. >> it is extraneous. it was a separate conversation that happened outside of these proceedings. an attorney said it wasn't just the race issue but that she talked about god is on my side were suggesting there was a religious aspect. those things are inflammatory and not supposed to be the way you talk about these cases when you prosecute them. she was disqualified from another branch of this case in 2022 regarding the lieutenant governor when she was involved or connected to a fund-raiser for his democratic opponent and what the judge said is we don't expect the d.a. has to be apolitical, but her prosecutions and investigations cannot be. >> let's say the prosecutor's office, they can all go and be dismissed in this case. if they knew early on, willis and wade are an item, and it is preceded, what is their culpability here? >> the reason they would have to be out is because they have joined arm in arm with willis and wade in this cause. i don't think there is a sensible way to disassociate them. i cannot see the office staying if willis has to go. the thing that peaked my interest when shannon was running through the timeline is, we have talked about a conflict and the ethical basis for asserting there is a conflict and we have to have them get out of the case. it is very interesting the lawyer for trump raised the possibility that wade was illegally hired without the consent of fulton county, which is county law. they needed to improve his hiring as a special prosecutor. that is the first strand i have heard that could lead to something where you have a possible argument the case should be thrown out. it is one thing to talk about ethical obligations. they get new lawyers in the case goes on. in federal law with respect to the grand jury, they are persnickety about who is authorized to be in the grand jury and that can go to whether the bringing the case was legitimate or not. that is the first argument they have that the indictment should be dismissed. >> even in her tone and tenor about how anyone would dare question her ethics and morals, this is from a couple of weeks ago. >> you are confused. these people are on trial for trying to steal an election. i am not on trial. i don't need anything from a man. a man is not a plan. a man is a companion. i think you are lying right here. this is the truth. >> it is a lie. >> that is surreal. the case, whatever you are trying to make has been completely knocked off its tracks with those statements. what did you think? >> it was a terrible defense strategy. you've heard the prosecutors today arguing reasonable doubt about why these text messages don't tell us what they tell us which is that they are in a relationship and they were communicating tens of thousands of times. there is no way to explain that away. there has been no answers on many of these direct questions and the judge has evidence of perjury in front of him. in terms of her future here, she is going down with the ship. she has made that decision. i do believe this is going to be not only an issue for this case, but for her professionally and maybe even clinically. >> you are in the prosecutor's office, you see some of the fallacious comments that have come out, the allegations, you are killing us here. it is one thing you have to go, but if we are all blacklisted by the same scarlet letter, we are doomed. you are embarrassing us to no end. i am wondering how that sinks into an entire office that can be shunted aside and then what? >> it is possible there is a state agency that will decide whether or not this moves to a different d.a. within the state. a different d.a. may handle this differently and not blame it as a rico case and not have multiple codefendants. it is important to note that you saw one of the attorneys today who was talking about what happens even fani willis stays on the case. they have to consider that possibility. if we cannot establish she has developed a personal interest in this case, we can move for a new trial. they are already thinking steps ahead and maybe people are thinking steps ahead if it goes the other way. you have to consider you are no longer on this case. the codefendants have to think about what happens if she stays on the case because that is a real possibility. >> there was a move afoot early on that they had built into the possibility, he returns to the white house, it can be dismissed or go away. what happens, they start from scratch, the rico thing notwithstanding, the state case versus making it a federal case, all of that is up in the air. >> for the moment, they have lost on that one. they tried to get it moved into federal court. he lost at the district court level and has lost at the 11th circuit so the question is whether they will try to appeal that to the supreme court. you can see the issue being intermingled with the fact the supreme court has taken trump's immunity claim and they are going to make a decision on that because if they make a ruling in that case for reason in that case about what the federal immunity is, what the out of perimeter of someone's federal responsibilities, that could affect the arguments meadows was making to say i was within the ambit of my federal responsibilities when i was doing the things i was charged with. >> they are speaking outside the courthouse and i want to go back to all of you. this is nathan wade's attorney. it's [indiscernible] i don't have any more comments. >> you say he was not in the area to see her? [indiscernible] it shows he was going there for other reasons and there were plenty of times when she was not down there at all. >> what about the cell phone data showing he was staying on that date overnight? >> i don't know anything about that. for all the reasons that were mentioned about the foundational problems and about the lack of testimony. >> what are your next steps in this case? [indiscernible] >> it is hard for me to hear but i think he was saying was there was nothing to see here and we can move on. nathan wade, the romantic interest of fani willis. on that particular issue, it was state versus the federal case. do something like this and give wider to changing the venue for somewhere in georgia, changing what type of case it is period? >> if they have to be booted, if the whole office has to be booted, it is going to be a new prosecutor from a different office with fresh eyes that will look at this and it seems to me that fani willis is the one invested in doing this case. she was talking about doing it as a state rico case for about a year before she brought the indictment. a lot of us have looked at this and don't think she has much of a conspiracy case. this is not a rico, i think personally. i did a lot of ricoh's in federal prosecution. i don't think this is something you would regard as a mafia family or the like. i doubt another prosecutor who wasn't invested in that theory looks at this case and says this is a ricoh. this case should have been five or six smaller cases and that is being reflected in the pleas that have been taken. not a single one of the four people who have pled guilty have pled guilty to ricoh. no one is going to do an hour in prison for what has been pled to so far. >> we are recovering to the racketeer influenced. he used that with great effect to get them behind bars. sometimes it was overruled, they were exonerated. you can draw multiple acts of racketeering activity that would raise eyebrows. the other big court development today, it was south of this one in florida and concerned donald trump and the court hearing regarding the documents case. how did that go? >> it was a big deal. we know the judge overseeing this documents case is likely going to be moving this trial that from may 20th. we don't know the date because both jack smith, the special counsel, and donald trump's attorneys have agreed may 20th is probably not going to happen. it is unlikely. donald trump was in court today. the date they would like would be july 8th. donald trump's attorney say they don't want this to happen before the election. they say it is not fair. they would like it to be after the election but they said they could settle on august 12th at the earliest to get everything together. no major headlines as far as a ruling today from the judge. she said she would be willing to look at some dates and get back to people in the coming days. donald trump's trial in d.c., this is the trial for his alleged attempts to overturn the election. that is on pause because the supreme court has agreed to hear this immunity issue, whether he can face charges or be prosecuted. here is what he said. >> you don't have immunity for a president and i am not talking about only me. you are -- you will not be able to function properly. you will not be able to do the right thing for the country. >> we don't have an official order here, it appears that may 20th is not going to happen in fort pierce, florida for this case. jack smith said as he is ready july 8th. donald trump's team said they could do august 12th if they have to. it remains to be seen what judge can and will do. it ended around 3:00 this afternoon. >> and donald trump was there. >> donald trump was in the courtroom, jack smith was in the courtroom, neither spoke. something interesting is in the southern district of florida, there are four locations where this trial could be held. it is possible she could move to west palm beach and i say possible because donald trump is commuting 70 miles from palm beach in a motorcade. if there is a trial that lasts ten weeks, it could take five weeks apiece. he could be motorcade eating every single day. >> it still means a case before the election in the case could be adjudicated and done before the election. >> if you add on the ten weeks in the middle of august, this is another important point, middle august, mid-september and october and in another two weeks it could add with a verdict right near the actual election. we have to see what judge cannon says. she didn't come out with a banner date to say we are going to do this or we are not going to do this. it is up in the air. both sides agree they can do a summer trial but the trump team wants it after the election. august 12 is the earliest they say they could be available. >> if i can pick your brain on this, the supreme court is taking up oral arguments around april 22nd. the immunity defense donald trump has, i shouldn't be fingered for or punished for when i step down. i am wondering if that could be among other factors that has the judge saying i am going to wait to hear what the supreme court is going to say about this and then push back even further. >> there are multiple things the supreme court is handling that could impact multiple court cases. we are waiting on the colorado ballot case. we don't have a ruling on whether the state entities were allowed to kick him off the ballot. we have a case argued in april who says the justice department wrongfully charged them under this obstruction and the justices are going to decide whether that was rightfully done or not. his lawyers have argued, we have to wait to see what the supreme court is going to do on that. they have narrowed the question of what they came to with. it is a long question but the justices are going to tackle that the week of april 22nd. it is likely to be at the end of the term, which pushes everything. the trial was supposed to start monday, jack smith's, but it is not going to. >> i have watched enough episodes of law in order to qualify as an expert. all kidding aside, i could be wrong, none of these cases emerge before the election. the two civil cases, the 100 millions of dollars that donald trump has to make, and the finance case with the new york state attorney general, but these criminal cases, you get the feeling that not one will start before the election. what do you think? >> i agree with that. we have to remember these are criminal cases. a defendant can do many things to get delays. it is not just gaming or strategy. they have significant constitutional rights and if it is reversed for denying rights or violating those rights, that is a hit on the case altogether. things have to be done meticulously. if he doesn't want these things to go to trial, they won't go. there are many ways to go about that. >> there is another camp out there, i don't know how reliable it is. we are not going to treat you differently than someone running for the highest office in the land. we are not going to let that affect our whole strategy to speed these trials or to get them going sooner rather than later. what do you think? >> that is one of the most offensive things about the law fair campaign. there is not a single right in our federal system that has absolute priority over all other rights. everything competes with everything else and the thought the administration of justice, which is not a constitutional right of anyone, that takes precedence over the public interests and not having criminal proceedings decide an election, which is an important constitutional proceeding. i find it baffling judges can cite administration of justice and all the concerns about the elections and first amendment go out the window. >> i want to thank you. we are trying to get a gauge of the legal and political fallout of all of this. donald trump is running away with it, super tuesday, he could be close to locking down the republican nomination. developments like this, people reminded of developments like this, they play a large role. we are going to explore that angle after thisfo. re hey little bear bear. ♪ ♪ ♪ i'm gonna love you forever ♪ ♪ ♪ c'mon, bear. ♪ ♪ ♪ you don't...you don't have to worry... ♪ ♪ be by your side... i'll be there... ♪ ♪ with my arms wrapped around... ♪ with so many choices on booking.com there are so many tina feys i could be. so i hired body doubles to help me out. splurgy tina loves a hotel near rodeo drive. oh tina! wild tina booked a farm stay to ride this horse. glenn close?! with millions of possibilities you can book whoever you want to be. that's my line! booking.com booking.yeah (♪) your ancestry is so much more than names and dates. (♪) c'mon! it's the story of your family - then and now. a story that made your name mean something. a story you're still writing. so discover your heritage. preserve your traditions. represent all that makes you, you. (♪) switch to shopify so you can build it better, scale it faster and sell more. much more. take your business to the next stage when you switch to shopify. i met with a turbotax expert because i had two full time jobs... lawyering and... liaming. count on me, mia. i'll file your taxes for you with 100% accuracy, guaranteed. let a turbotax full-service expert do your taxes as soon as today. >> we raised it with our fine lawyer. the possibility that donald trump might not see criminal cases come to life before the presidential election. it's possible given the aggressive time line. bob, good to see you. that will be big advantage donald trump. everything seems to be coming together. not these incredible payments and issues that were raised by any measure, he's dodging some other criminal bullets for the time being. >> yeah, things are going well. certainly the supreme court decision this week, which a lot of legal scholars did to expect the supreme court to take up the immunity case. that's a huge win for trump. he could win the case and delay past the election. not every case here is federal. at the same time, he can have a lot of power. listen, if he's president, i don't think jack smith will be around for that much longer. do you? >> you got super tuesday coming up. you got 800 plus delegates at stake. he's well on his way to this nomination. this idea that she can pull back on the possibly something legally for him, he's got more time to raise money to cover these penalties and he's facing and appealing in new york. outside of that, it's kind of all sky is blue. >> absolutely. listen, even if that occurs, i don't think trump world if there's a health issue or a legal issue, i don't think they're going to accept nikki haley. i don't think she's much of an insurance people. they will look to whoever trump picks as vp. listen, things are looking good for trump. it could be all be over next week. >> i'm looking at all these legal cases he's dealing with. all the money for the lawyers all over the country. a lot of the campaign funds went to pay those legal bills. a lot more probably will. there's nothing illegal about that. he's going to be at a financial disadvantage to joe biden who has $700 million cash fund going now. >> that's right. biden doesn't have a primary, the dnc said there's no primary. kind of fixed for the president. biden is able to raise money. the president has been struggling. immigration is a number one issue according to most polls. people don't think he's handling it very well. he's raising money. that is an advantage for biden. >> got it. always great talking to you. bob cusack and chief. the markets were worried. we picked up in march where we left off in february. continue our winning ways on the week. the dow is down little bit. all the three averages are up. nasdaq and s&p 500 hitting record. a lot of it has to do with technology and optimism and interest rates aren't going up soon. no guarantee there. that's a lot of the juice that's been getting the wall street. you got high-tech names making money and having the revenues and big profits to prove it. that's a big distinction from the internet boom we saw in 1999 and suddenly imploded in 2000. a lot of the people i talk to on the streets say that is not going to happen this time. they could be wrong. that is something we will be exploring a lot more this weekend. 10:00 a.m. eastern time on weekend show. when we explore how the markets have resisted this, how donald trump has resisted constant legal attacks on him to the point now where he's running away with the republican nomination. right now, his lawyers are running away with court cases that could be delayed substantially. advantage donald trump. here's "the five." ♪ ♪

Related Keywords

Federal Court , Mortgage , Home , Top , Safe House , Fact , Job , Concern , Life , House , Safety , Vandalism , Led , Father , Credibility , Daughter , Times , Family , Credence , Friends , Separation , Isolation , 13 , Statements , Media , Nature , Text Messages , Instances , Falsehoods , Position , School , College , Hbcu , Someone , Validity , Costs , Case , Office , Land , Murder Rate , Rates , Crime , Evidence , Conflict , Wall , Honor , Testimony , District , Witnesses , Relationship , Nathan Wade , Mr , Prosecution , Outcome , Benefit , Things , Black , Corroboration , Team , Sifting , Individuals , Word , Report , Special Grand Jury , 39 , 19 , Defendants , Defense Counsel , Opportunity , Gains , Assertions , Trial , Motive , Reason , Sense , It Doesn T Line Up , Lot , Cases , Profile Prosecutions , One , Goal , Riches , Lifestyle , Doubletree In Napa , Allegations , People , Joke , Hotel , Seasons , Doubletree , Ritz Carlton , Rich And Famous , Four , Issue , Misconduct , Words , Miss , Innocence , Guilt , None , Nothing , Relation , Any , 95 , Commission Rate , Race , Conviction Rate , Being , Religion , Comments , Speech , Table , Officials , Two , Marjorie Taylor Greene , Names , Bridget Thorne , Knowledge , Commissioners , Member , Work , Mcburney , Statement , Conduct , Forensic Misconduct , Electors , Mid September , Drive , Defense , Hypocrisy Interesting , Videos , Cell Phone , Version , Information , Harm , Willis , Threat , Instance , Something , Chain , Ability , Way , Estate , Order , Motion , District Attorney , Requirements , Standard , Disqualification , Bias , Accusations , Means , Argument , Prosecutors , Courts , Conflicts , Unreceptive , Burden , Conjunction , Bonnie Wi Willis , Fa Fani Willis , Rebuttal , Questions , Terrence Bradley , Counsel , Communications , Everything , Determinations , Over , Attorney Client Privilege , Bradley , Stand , Shouldn T , Confrontation , Rest , Discussion , Second , 2 , Judge , Mcafee , Character , Church , Degree , Oman , Others , Everybody , Anything , Us , Story , Taylor Greene , Definitions , Racist , Problem , Let S Go , Issues , No One , Soul , Dating , Daddy Didn T , Daddy , Parties , Beginning , Anywhere , Public , 2021 , Both , Meeting , Nobody Else , Who Else , They Didn T Go To , Partner , Person , Motives , Strongest , Anyone , Stake , Most , November 1st , 1 , Consideration , Ones , Everyone , Answer , Docket , Supreme Court Decision , Defense Attorney , Record , Election , Attorney , Test , Behalf , November 2021 , Interference , Defense Team , Representative , Affair , Investigation , Facts , Attention , Lawyers Don T Act , Prosecutors Don T Act , Pattern , Couple , It , Fallout , Game , The End , Atlanta , D A , Election Interference , Talk , Focus , Seven , Politics , Reelection , Appeal , Witness Box , Effect , Chances , Doesn T Go , Sides , Off , Territory , Him Off , Lie , Profit , Oath , 1 Million , A Million , Presentation , Part , Microphone , Heels , Community , Traction , Notch , Courtroom , Attorneys , Pressure , Emotions , Defiance , Side , Stock , Scorn , Liars , Money , Vote , Who , Performance , Assistant , Place , Needle , Prosecuting , Appearance , Thousands , Bits , Thing , Scratch , Behavior , Ground Rules , Collateral Impact , Perjury , Candor , Indictment , Thought , Impact , Terms , Accounting , Damage Control , Determination , Purpose , Bottom Line , Circus , Question , Proceedings , Ways , Manhattan D A , Speed , Feet , Hip , Advocate , Principles , Add , Boss , South Florida , Connection , Six , Documents Case , Window , Complications , Washington , Horizon , Calendar , Time Line , More , Series , Timeline Bites , Timing , Interests , Appointment , Imp , 2019 , Fulton County , Approval , Benefits , Spot , Boyfriend , Him , What Willis , Friend , Law Partner , Contractor , Details , The Stand , Speculating , Assessment , Difference , Lies , Role , Gain , Conflict Of Interest , Loop , Ground , Advantage Donald Trump , Lawyers , Race Card , Courthouse , Conversation , Card , Wasn T , Aspect , God , Lieutenant Governor , Fund Raiser , Branch , 2022 , Prosecutions , Opponent , Investigations , Prosecutor , Culpability , Item , Arm , Cause , Interest , Running , Basis , Shannon , Possibility , Trump , Lawyer , Strand , Special Prosecutor , County Law , Consent , Hiring , Obligations , Law , Grand Jury , Respect , Tenor , Tone , Ethics , Morals , Companion , Plan , Truth , Whatever , Tracks , Defense Strategy , Doubt , Tens Of Thousands Times , Many , Answers , Front , Ship , Scarlet Letter , State Agency , End , Moves , Sinks , Codefendants , Rico , Steps , Move , White House , Hair , Level , 11th Circuit , 11 , Supreme Court , Intermingled , Immunity Claim , Ruling , Immunity , Perimeter , Arguments , Responsibilities , Ambit , Meadows , Indiscernible , All Of You , Area , Reasons , Cell Phone Data , Problems , Saying , Somewhere , Venue , Georgia , Type , Eyes , You Don T , Ricoh , Conspiracy , Mafia Family , Like , Theory , Wasn T Invested , Pleas , Guilty Have , Five , Racketeer , Prison , Influenced , Acts , Bars , Racketeering Activity , Big Court Development Today , Eyebrows , Court Hearing , Documents , Deal , May 20th , 20 , Jack Smith , Special Counsel , July 8th , 8 , Headlines , August 12th , 12 , Attempts , Pause , D C , President , Immunity Issue , Charges , Country , Fort Pierce , 00 , 3 , Locations , Spoke , Southern District , Motorcade , West Palm Beach , 70 , Ten , August , Middle , Cannon , Verdict , Summer Trial , Banner , Brain , August 12 , 22 , April 22nd , Factors , Immunity Defense , Has , Court Cases , Colorado , Justice , Ballot Case , Ballot , State Entities , Department , Justices , What The Supreme Court , Obstruction , Term , Kidding , Expert , Episodes , Finance Case , Millions , New York State Attorney General , 100 Millions , Feeling , Rights , Strategy , Defendant , Delays , Gaming , Hit , Camp , Trials , Right , Campaign , System , Priority , Administration , Judges , Proceeding , Elections , Gauge , Concerns , Amendment , Nomination , Developments , Super Tuesday , Republican , Angle , Little Bear , Thisfo , I Ll Be There , Bear , You Don T , Body Doubles , Choices , Arms , Feys , Rodeo Drive , Splurgy , Possibilities , That S My Line , Horse , Farm Stay , Wild Tina , Glenn Close , Ancestry , Then And Now , Booking Com Yeah , Name , Heritage , Traditions , Business , Stage , Shopify , Mia , Taxes , Lawyering , Turbotax Expert , Accuracy , Jobs , Count , Turbotax , Liaming , 100 , Advantage , Payments , Bob Cusack , Bullets , Measure , Immunity Case , Scholars , Win , Listen , Think , Power , He S , 800 , Idea , Kind , Health Issue , Don T Think Trump , Sky , World , New York , Penalties , Insurance , Vp , Trump Picks , Nikki Haley , Campaign Funds , Joe Biden , Bills , Disadvantage , Primary , Cash Fund , Biden Doesn T , Dnc , 700 Million , 00 Million , Immigration , Struggling , Polls , Talking To You , Chief , Averages , Dow , Markets , Three , Guarantee , Interest Rates , Hitting Record , Technology , Optimism , Juice , Wall Street , Nasdaq , S P 500 , 500 , Distinction , Profits , Revenues , Internet Boom We Saw , 1999 , Streets , 2000 , 10 , Show , Attacks ,