Neil advantage, by then . Maybe not in a pulled muscle for in the the money grandmother president race is a staggering 53 Million Bucks last month thats essentially what donald trump paid in legal bills last year. And the money keeps pouring in for team buyin. This is the legal bills keep piling on 14 trump. Now the president has said this is that this week to embark on a taken to nevada and arizona and texas but not before very important phone calls today with israeli Prime MinisterBenjamin Netanyahu chemical tell you what the president said and checking with Joe Lieberman on what he think the president should have said. All that and the president of the United StatesSteelworkers Union and why he is glad over Something Else joe biden said, even if you hasnt committed to joe biden yet. [ ] neil welcome everybody got glad to have you got im neil cavuto neil cavuto. The rest of this week for precedents something that theyve already been doing quite effectively. The 53 million in february campaign is telling us is the most ever for a democratic candidate in an Election Year. So there is a lot of dollar though and it comes as a mistress and is hoping to shore up support with progressives who are mad the president is not pushing for a ceasefire in gaza. President biden urged today on a one were told was a businesslike Phone Call Netanyahu to target hamas and rafah without ordering a foreground invasion and it sounds Like Netanyahu did bring up Chuck Schumers recent call for new elections in israel. The Prime Minister did read his concerns about a variety of things come out in the American Press. Something else in the American Press today, President Bidens Anger Boiling Organic scenes that according to report by nbc news specifically when a storm a couple weeks back that his handling of the war is costing him votes in places like michigan. The court is he began to shout and swear. So when he does that, is he shouting and swearing about netanyahu or about hamas or about his pole numbers . This is when did you stop beating your spouse question, will because i dont think he ever did that. Well use that as a premise of your question which is when he does that, im never seen him do that, showed or swear in response to that. So from my perspective, that particular report is not correct. There have been numerous reports about President Bidens frustrations frustration with Benjamin Netanyahu dating back to the end last year but their National Security advisor says he hasnt seen any of that. Neil peter cowan thank you. Youre duty at the white house new mark big republican fundraiser come under they need to keep doing that because there are we behind the president and darshan what the will begin move the money raised is obviously very important. Its done diddly to improve the president pulled numbers but you has a lot of powder there. What do you think . I think it could make a difference down the line. Not so much neil in the media because were going to have Saturation Coverage and adds but you getting out the vote in november. There theres early voting cant vote by mail voting in churches and the like. There the socalled bark bella target harvesting that republicans combine about. When you have resources like the president is raising and i get two or three emails a week inviting me to fundraisers as that says to me that they are going to have the resources, the troops and the will to get the vote out an election that he is now trailing and enthusiasm is on the republican side speed to speak back my. Neil the money part is on the democratic side and enthusiasm to his points under publican side but eventually you will need money to put to good use to that enthusiasm, right . Youre going to need a lot of money and right now the Republican Party has just changed leadership so theres a lot of dissatisfaction with Rona Mcdaniels and now weve got a change at the helm. A lot of concern that some of the major donors that im talking to have is the fact that the checks that they may right to the or and see are going to be going to cover Legal Expenses versus programs like, you know, mynio blitzing, direct male and get out the vote efforts which are crucial for maximum there is one concern. I actually think thats the rnc Tract Campaign super pacs need to actually set up is a different there could be a downer that it will you want to help and donate, you know, five, 10 million to help president from alleviate some of that expenses and they can donate to a certain but then there are sum, you know, regular donors that actually want to go knowing that we are going to be spending that on get out the vote and other entities that are good to be focused not on the legal bills. So i think that the challenge is going to be what the rnc the kind of set that aside because these donors are very concerned. Like a sea of donating doing something whether you want to know where your money is going on in over and i think that donors have a right to know where this money is going to go. And there are a lot of donors that are very passionately wanting to help pay down those legal bills. I know. There are some of those. And so let them donate to a fund that specifically, clearly says this is for his legal bills and thus there is another entity that you can use for get on the vote and other efforts. I think its very important. Neil on that issue found there because i know youre a democrat but the Republican National committee has wanted to make clear that the money raised for the party through the committee will not go to legal bills but it wasnt on the unequivocal. There might be ways around that. What you think of that . I think there is a real problem. I mean, noel makes a fare point about some small number of people who decide they want to pay Donald Trumps legal bills. Most political contributors in my experience at a talked to a lot of democratic donors they want to paint paper activities that help collector candidates are not get them out a legal trouble. So i would say that the way trump has operated politically and personally is such that if there is legal room that could leave open enough of a pandoras box next is to lead some donors in a situation where the republicans are being overwhelmed with democratic money whereas some donors could stand on the sidelines when the republicans and the rnc need them really quite desperately. Neil you mentioned the legal issues and the control i saw onto alert and i want to follow it up with you, noelle. Were learning that donald trump is no requesting a clear overview of the ruling that the two disqualify the Georgia Prosecuting i mention it with you because it continues this legal backandforth and thats his another legal measure you are taking that that is added to all these other cases that either could delay them but it certainly means more legal bills. Youre thoughts . Yeah, i mean the is the last thing that we need as a Republican Party, to have this ongoing occurring expensive but it is a reality. So we have to deal with it. It is a reality. Neil and by the way, hes not the first person to express surprise i even amazement at the fact that fani willis just to keep her job. But whether that is justified or not, where you cite see this going college or the case, at best delayed have some argue is falling apart as we speak . It does seem to be falling apart, i mean with a focus now on her and now not on biden and most Noelle Nikpour and whats going on there is a huge distraction. I will tell you as you are looking at money and this is another distraction from, you know, contributing of republican daughter, this is going to be a great opportunity, super pacs to express those donors because super pacs are you know cannot coordinate for the campaign so this is going to be a great opportunity for these independent super pacs that wanted to advertise and do everything that they can because all that money in a super pack as you know its open and it is extracting money from donors and it is used in every dollar spent right up until the end of the election there so, yeah, this is not neil understood, im really jumping on both of you and i apologize but as all the time we have. Well continue to look at this do call into question the wisdom of people fani willis as a Special Prosecutor on the case in georgia. In case ce that might be unraveling as we speak in the meantime the Supreme Court taking up a very big issue is between what is the difference between say the white house persuading you to change your policies and coursing used to do so . Jonathan hunt has more from the Supreme Court. Jonathan . David spun, i apologize. David . Rep max no worries. A stake case here this report for a highstakes issue in an Election Year and well tell you what the justices have to say, thats coming up. Which paint color matches your bold style. And with the mylowes rewards credit card, you can save 5 every day. You got this. And we got you. Meet the jennifers. Each planning their future through the chase mobile app. Hellooo new apartment. One bank for now. For later. For life. Chase. Make more of whats yours. We all need fiber for our digestive health, but less than 10 of us get enough each day. Good thing Metamucil Gummies are an easy way to get prebiotic, plantbased fiber. With the same amount of fiber as 2 cups of broccoli. Metamucil gummies the easy way to get your daily fiber. [ ] you when they were pushing Social Media Platforms to take down for that maybe smack fossils about the pandemic and even the 2020 president ial election. Others appealing saying this is going too far white house, you can do that while the spring court taking up this very matter today. David spun has more from washington. Reporter with afternoon from the Supreme Court. Critics of the administration say its quite simple. The frontend administration colluded with big tech companies, social media companies, you try to limit what could be sent on some of those major platforms while the justices were interested in hearing some of this pregame, it appears the majority may rule against that theory. Butter course never know what the justices will rule on how they will rule i should say until the rule which will likely be the end of june early july but The Big Question is the divided administration improperly coordinates with some of these largest tax forms in the country to moderate contact content . Cant think about forcing my private parties on facebook and X Formerly Twitter and other big sites. Administration accused and sued for collaborating with these sites especially related to Health Policy like the covid vaccine. Heres a skeptical Justice Sam Alito questioning the government followed by justice tonje Brown Jackson with complete opposite view. The only reason why this is taking place is because the federal government has got section 230 at an antitrust in his pockets and to mix my metaphors and it got these big clubs available to it and so its treating facebook and these other platforms like vr subordinates. Our view has the significant ways in most important time periods. The government actually has a duty to take steps to protect the citizens of this country. Reporter a significant case dealing with Health Policy, also National Security at Election Security related issues during this highstakes Election Year again, we will have a decision from the justices at the end of the term. Neil david carr thank you very much. Katie because he the former president law attorney. Katie, the court seems he never know our cleaning on the point here, deciding whether the government in the does have the rights at least to question information that is going out there without using a cordial to force the issue. Address if you think its the latter undergoing three threepart you be dead set against this. It just sort of store during this other than there is the issue backandforth between persuasion and coercion. Where are we . Mother is exactly right. The court did not some convenes that at least based on the justices question during argument that the government had gone so far as to coerce the platforms to remove speech but simply were trying to persuade them, which the case law has previously held that state actors can in fact try to persuade certain speech to be regulated or removed but they can cross the line over into coercion and that leaves us with a question of what exactly is coercion and Justice Alito pointed out that the government has significant power over these platforms and critical particular with section 2030 and that in and of itself could potentially lead to that conclusion but other justices did not seem to take that position. Neil you know, im reminded, Anderson Michael legal input here that this is an episode out on the sopranos. The government gets in contact you think will be a very good idea for you to correct these false stories that are out there on vaccines and treatments for them, the comments about gherig 2020 election. You think would be a very good idea for you to look into this or Say Something about this and ordering it. Well, the idea here is that the government can make such a position known but they cant cross the line into actually cursing the platforms to removing that data and, of course, were looking back in retrospect and some of these posts and noting that some of their smack my having been truthful by the time of the decisions were made is where the courts are not analysing this from and whether the actual government actors went too four because a court seems to recognize that you do have some interest and some authority to make there positions known and their preferences known for that matter but the line of coercion is really where this case will come down on. Neil but it is intimidating and your understanding end of that weather its an ongoing order on a strong suggestion against the justices will decide about that whether thats coercion that. Thats exactly right and i would agree that i think its troubling to think how much involvement the government can affirmatively have with these platforms and coordinating with them or whatever word you want to use but certainly there is significant interactions between them to affect by the preferences of the government. So the court doesnt seem to think that the First Amendment violation but many people we wouldve previously may be thought that i was getting very close and not crossing that line. Neil i would be remiss and when and as this thought out trump move as the georgia judge to allow him to allow appeal a ruling that keeps as the Lead Prosecutor what did you make of that . I think that that wasnt necessary move back trumps side to us to make a pretrial ruling or an appeal on that particular issue because that there is in fact impact the case progressing. Is typically not something that would be allowed to be appealed pretrial and something that could be reviewed again after the fact but there is no harm in asking the question and it certainly was the right move for the defense in this case. Neil but hes asking the judge himself, the judge isnt going to reverse this not on his own is the . The judge is probably not going to reverse his own decision. It is normal to ask for reconsideration of certain rulings if they are not favorable and there are certain circumstances where judges will reconsider certain facts that he would miss miss our planet something in the record and could come down differently. Is not abnormal but in this particular case i think the judge has given throw thoroughly from his perspective to the conclusion and i would not anticipate a reversal so does he make an announcement to that effect marginal what im getting is that whether this is another delay in getting this resumed if it ever ever gets resumed. Typically a motion for reconsideration can be decided fairly quickly and it would be document in the record. I dont know if there will be a formal announcement or not but certainly there will be documented in some way. Neil do you think this case will start to get dry before the election . Fani willis case has significant issues that from this codification issue which has already kinda been handled at this point, there was the dismissal of a significant amount of charges and the reason those charges were dismissed is because they were drafted improperly meaning they didnt allege in advance but they could actually be reunited if there were two worded differently so i think many of us need to decide if you want to seek a second indictment on those charges if this is going to proceed and then kind of collaterally there are going to be i would imagine the investigations by the state bar and other interesting agencies into financial money wasnt conduct. Dont hundred smack but i think that it certainly could have an impact and if so in terms of the trial date i would anticipate that it would be shifted, again i dont think will be tried before the ele