Kate Bolduan gives a fresh take on todays top stories. Kate Bolduan gives a fresh take on todays top stories. Kate Bolduan gives a fresh take on todays top stories. Three of the names included the word senate, which meant which appears to mean that they were trying to go after certain senators, Certain Senate offices. Its not clear because microsoft did intervene in what looks like an early stage which senators they might have gone after. We do know last month, we heard that Senator Mccaskill of missouri, one of the most vulnerable democrats, was targeted also by Russian Military intelligence. We have not heard from the white house yet today. We have heard from the kremlin. Of course, you can imagine they did come out denying any knowledge of this hacking group, of the hackers many its. It says, from the u. S. We hear there was not any meddling in the elections. Whom exactly they are talking about, what is the proof and on what grounds are they reaching such conclusions . Think about that. They are saying from the u. S. We hear that there was not meddling in the elections. Every level of the u. S. Government, intelligence and
Kate Bolduan gives a fresh take on todays top stories. Elections, but focused on perhaps critical viewpoints of Vladimir Putin who are up for election or who will also be engaging in u. S. Elections. They are focused on what is best, obviously for Vladimir Putin. National security adviser john bolton suggested a couple of days ago that russia isnt the only threat here. Talk a listen. I can say definitely its a sufficient National Security concern about chinese meddling, iranian and north korean meddling that we are taking steps to try and prevent it. Its all four of those countries really. All four of those countries. Are they on the same par, the other three, with russia . What we can say is that russia is the most aggressive actor in trying to interfere in the United States political discourse. We would expect other Nation States to mount influence operations. Its abundantly clear that russia is the most aggressive
unsettled. He didnt know everything that happened when white House Counsel don mcgahn, everything he said to special Counsel Robert Mueller about the Russia Investigation. Trump tweeting, he allowed mcgahn to testify and didnt seem concerned. Those same sources tell cnn the president did not know the conversations lasted 30 hours. Nor that his legal team did not fully debrief mcgahn afterwards. Ryan nobles is at the white house. How is this playing in terms of tension within the white house and don mcgahn . It cant be easy. Keep in mind that don mcgahn serves as white House Counsel. He is here at work on a regular basis, still has to deal with the president as well. I think the interesting thread in all of this is that mcgahn seems trying to make sure everyone understands that he views the role of the white House Counsel as being someone who protects the presidency and is the legal voice for the presidency as the office, not for donald trump the person. Thats where the divide seems to be right now between the president , his legal team and don mcgahn. What the New York Times article clearly states is that when don mcgahn was told by the president s private lawyers he should go and take part in these interviews and they were not going to be holding up Attorney Client privilege, that mcgahn became concerned that perhaps he was being set up, that this was something that could be used to make him the fall guy if the Special Counsel determined there was obstruction of justice. The president and his legal team have gone out of their way to say this was all part of their plan, they were trying to be as transparent as possible. What were finding after this New York Times report came out is that they did not know the full breadth of what don mcgahn talked to with the Special Counsel. There are few people that know exactly whats going on here in the white house over the past year and a half than don mcgahn. That appears to be what has the president and his legal team concerned. Ryan nobles with the latest. Thank you. Just ahead, can the president actually take over the
Mueller Investigation . In a new interview, President Trump says, yeah. But is that really the case . Plus the president takes aim at another former intel official who dared to criticize him, phil mudd. We will look at what sparked the new threat next. Booking a flight at the last minute doesnt have to be expensive. Just go to priceline. Its the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40 . Just tap and go. For the best savings on flights, go to priceline. When we switched our auto and home insurance. With liberty, we could afford a real babysitter instead of your brother. Hey oh, thats my robe. Is it . When you switch to Liberty Mutual,
you could save 782 on auto and home insurance. And still get great coverage for you and your family. Call for a free quote today. You could save 782. Liberty mutual insurance. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. There has been another note from the jury. This is the third note that we have seen throughout these deliberations. This is day four of deliberations. We understand now that the defense team, the prosecution and the jury, they are all in judge elliss courtroom. At this point, we will find out a little bit more what this note says. The previous notes we have seen, most of them have related to when jurors want to adjourn for the day. Given this is about 11 15 in the morning, they have only been at it for less than two hours, that seems quite improbable. Its likely that this note may seek some further instruction from the judge. As the defense team was walking in, Kevin Downing was asked, do you think this is a verdict . Kevin downing said, no, this is just a note. Their understanding is that this is likely just some jury just seeking clarification from the judge. Remember, erica, we saw one such note on the first day of deliberations. The jury in that instance asked four questions. They asked for some specifics about the tax filings, the foreign bank accounts. They also asked the judge, you can clarify for us what reasonable doubt means. That was the one question that this judge answered. He basically said, reasonable doubt. The prosecutors have to prove beyond a reasonable daughter. Its more than just possible doubt. Its not beyond all reasonable doubt here. Wondering what exactly this juror the jury is asking the judge in this case. Were going to see this play out. I will give you more information as soon as we know. We know you will let us know as soon as you have that. Appreciate it. Thank you. President trump is raising eyebrows. In a new interview with lawyers he says he is leery of sitting down for questions in the Russia Investigation because the Special Counsel could be setting a perjury trap. He says he is keeping his distance for now. I decided to stay out, he says. I dont have to stay out, as you know. I could go in and i could do
whatever. I could run it if i want. Lets bring in one of the reporters who took part in yesterdays interview with President Trump, jeff mason, White House Correspondent for reuters. Being in that room did the president really mean, i could replace Robert Mueller with myself . Well, all i can say is what he said. That is what he said. The context of that, the in between part that was question is he said that i have decided to stay out. I wouldnt have to, but i have decided that its better for me to stay out. He made clear it was an option and the fact that part of the option at least in terms of what he said yesterday was to run the thing is understandably getting a lot of attention. He said the overall context of that comment was, he is keeping himself at arms length despite feeling like he has another option not to do that. In terms of Robert Mueller, he brought up mueller and Security Clearances. What did he say on that front . We asked him about that. Just last week, on friday when he was boarding marine 1, he spoke to reporters and in the same breath talking about the next person, mr. Ohr at the justice he was considering taking Security Clearance away from, he started talking about mueller having conflict of interest. I asked him, are you considering taking mr. Muellers Security Clearance away . He paused for a second and then said, i havent given a lot of thought to that. When we followed up later, he said, no comment. I dont know. If its something he has considered or not, he certainly is very critical of the Mueller Investigation. He repeated again in our interview he viewed it as a witch hunt and talked about in that same context the possibility of doing an interview with muellers team, that being a potential perjury trap like his lawyer Rudy Giuliani has said. They are sending that message out. He also mentioned in terms of the Mueller Investigation we know about the continued threat we are facing. We have findings from microsoft this morning. The president continuing to ignore in this interview he was saying if it was russia and he was concerned the investigation is actually playing into russias hands. Doesnt seem to be concerned his continued denial could be playing into russias hands. No, indeed. He brought that up on his own. We didnt ask him again, are you convinced russia was responsible for the 2016 election. Thats something he has weighed in on. Corrected himself on during and after the helsinki press conference. Yesterday, we were talking about what he felt he had achieved in his relationship with president putin. And about that Mueller Investigation. He said, look, i think things are going very well for my Aminute Straami administration. The economy is going well. The one place its not going well is the Mueller Investigation and its playing into putins hands. Included in that answer was another dig at the possibility of russia not having been responsible for meddling in the 2016 election despite the evidence and conclusion by his own intelligence agencies. Appreciate you joining us today. Thank you. My pleasure. With us now, jack quinn, white House Counsel in the Clinton Administration and cnn political analyst and National Political reporter, eliana johnson. Picking up where we left off in terms of the president s mindset on russia, not surprising what he told jeff there. We heard this from the president before. As Everything Else is playing out around him, he was noting jeff was noting the president brought this up on his own. Clearly, it must be top of mind. And yet, were seeing all the other things are swirling. We have omarosa last week. We have mcgahn this week. Cnn reporting the president is feeling unsettled by everything. How much is all of this starting to weigh on the west wing itself and whats actually getting
done . You know, i think were in the dog days of summer. We have seen the president sort of filling the void in the west wing by tweeting out attacks on Robert Mueller on twitter. Clearly, all of this stuff is top of mind for him. The Mueller Probe, which he has been told is coming to a close, Paul Manaforts trial which we may be getting a jury verdict on any day. The upcoming midterm elections which will be its own verdict on the first two years of the trump presidency. I think the president knows that he is going to be getting the voters the voters will vote on his first two years in office. He is feeling the heat, both from the Mueller Probe and from voters going to the ballot box. In terms of feeling the heat, we dont hear much from Robert Mueller. Not a lot of leaks. The president has upped his attacks, jack, on Robert Mueller. Not on mcgahn but in the wake of
what we learned about don mcgahn, upping his attacks on Robert Mueller and actually saying, i could run the thing. How should we read that . How do you think Robert Mueller reads that . Im sure he is as baffled as many of us are. He cant run this thing. To do so would require getting rid of Robert Mueller and the team under him. That would create a constitutional crisis. Hopefully, he was being hyperbolic and once again exhibiting the egoism that he brings to the job and feeling that he can run this as well as anything, because he is the supreme commander. He also brought up, jack, this idea of a perjury trap, which he and Rudy Giuliani have floated multiple times, which a number of attorneys i have spoken with, said, thats a term they are putting out. You dont set a trap for someone
to come in and lie. Does the president have a point when you look at it that a couple of people can be in the same conversation and they can both walk away with different interpretations of how it happened . Thats different. Thats not a perjury trap. In a prosecution, you are trying to get to the truth. A perjury trap is a term of art which refers to a situation in which a prosecutor lures an otherwise innocent target into the grand jury, for example, and for the sole purpose of getting that person to commit perjury. Knowing the person will deny something, for example, that the prosecutor already knows. A perjury trap is only a trap in a circumstance in which, number one, the prosecutor is acting
with ill motive and number two, when the target is you know for sure that that person is going to lie. In normal circumstances, a perjury trap doesnt exist when the witness will tell the truth. The solution to any perjury trap, of course, is simply telling the truth as you know it. You make that sound so easy, jack. We have to leave it there. Appreciate you joining us. We are getting more activity from outside the courthouse. We are waiting on a verdict in Paul Manaforts trial there. The jury sent a note. Jessica schneider is live with more. What are you hearing . Reporter it appears that this is not a verdict. We are hearing from the courtroom that the jury has, in fact, submitted yet another note. Again, we have seen a note from this jury before. It was on thursday where they asked those four questions. Were waiting to get the details of exactly what question or
questions the jury has now submitted to the judge. We understand that the defense team, prosecutors, they are in the courtroom. How this unfolds, the jury will be brought into the courtroom. The judge will the clerk probably will read the question from the jury and then the judge would determine how exactly to answer this. Whats interesting is, last week on thursday, the jury asked four questions and the judge actually only answered the one pertaining to reasonable doubt. As to the other ones, he didnt provide any specific instruction. He said, just rely on your recollections, your best memory of what happened during trial. We will wait to see what the question is from the jury. It is important to remember here, were all counting the minutes and hours and days of the deliberations. But these are 18 complicated counts that this jury has to come to a unanimous verdict on each and every count, whether thats for conviction or acquittal. We seem to be quite antsy, but
its possible this jury is just really being painstaking about this and we will see what this note entails to see maybe what charges they might be up to, what might really be a Sticking Point for them and then we will go from there. We will keep you posted as this jury has, in fact, submitted a note. Were waiting to find out exactly what this question is for the judge. The question or questions and how they will be answered in court. Jessica with the latest for us. Thank you. Just ahead, a new threat from the president sparking new questions about who will be allowed to keep their Security Clearance. Trump warning fill mudd, a former cia and fbi official. Why the warning . Stay with us. Labor day event . Where you can shop with confidence and convenience plus get these 4 benefits from kenmore at sears. Up to fifty percent off appliances with your sears card. Like this washer and dryer for 539. 99 each. And this refrigerator for 899. 99. Hurry in to sears today. My dbut now, i take used tometamucil every day. Sh
it traps and removes the waste that weighs me down, so i feel lighter. Try metamucil, and begin to feel what lighter feels like. Rewards me basically aeverywhere. Om so why am i hosting a dental convention after party in my vegas suite . Because hotels. Com lets me do me. Who wants to floss me . Hotels. Com. You do you and get rewarded. You may be learning about, medicare and supplemental insurance. Medicare is great, but it doesnt cover everything. Only about 80 of your part b medicare costs. A Medicare Supplement Insurance Plan may help cover some of the rest. Learn how an aarp Medicare Supplement Insurance Plan, insured by Unitedhealthcare Insurance Company might be the right choice for you. A free Decision Guide is a great place to start. Call today to request yours. So what makes an aarp Medicare Supplement plan unique . These are the only Medicare Supplement plans endorsed by aarp because they meet aarps high standards of quality and service. Youre also getting the great features that any Medicare Supplement plan provides. You may choose any doctor that accepts medicare patients. You can even visit a specialist. With this type of plan there are no networks or referrals needed. Also, a Medicare Supplement plan. Goes with you when you travel anywhere in the u. S. Call today for a free guide. Mom okay we need to get all your School Supplies today. School. Grade. Done. Done. Hit the Snooze Button and get low prices on School Supplies all summer long. Like these for only 2 or less at office depot officemax. Like these for only 2 or less im a fighter. Always have been. When i found out i had agerelated macular degeneration, amd, i wanted to fight back. My doctor and i came up with a plan. It includes preservision. Only Preservision Areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula recommended by the National Eye Institute to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd. Thats why i fight. Because its my vision. Preservision. Also, in a greattasting chewable. Now, ill dream gig. Now more businesses, in more places, can afford to dream gig. Comcast, building americas largest gigspeed network. Totally unglued. President trump continuing to taught his critics. His latest target, phil mudd. The president reacting to this exchange from fridays ac 360. When i am requested to sit on an advisory, let me ask you one question. How much do you think im paid to do that at the request of the u. S. Government . Give me one answer. You got ten seconds. How much . I will ask you a question. How much are you paid for your answer the question. Your Contracting Gig for i have no contract with the u. S. Government that pays money. Zero. In a tweet the president said mudd was unglued and weird and questioned his mental condition. The president has seen controversy after yanking the Security Clearance for john brennan last week. Lets break it down with chris alizza. He tweeted about Clapper Maying maybe clapper is being nice to me in his criticism of john brennan so he doesnt lose his Security Clearance. It feels like it is becoming a reality show of what can i do to keep my Security Clearance or take it away. Becoming a reality show. The only thing i disagree is i think its been a reality show for a while. This is the latest twist. We know donald trump likes the idea of revoking Security Clearances in the same way he likes the idea of president ial pardons because he can just do it. There is a sort of policy in place by which typically Security Clearance are considered to be revoked. A wrote a piece last week. There are 13 ways and reasons by which they are typically revoked, Mental Stability is one, alcohol or drug abuse or suspected drug abuse. Those are the usual reasons. Disagreeing politically this is in regards to john brennan is not one. Not being friendly enough to the administration as Kellyanne Conway said john brennan wasnt is not one. I do think when you are sort of dangling it in front of people thats not what the Revocation Process is supposed to look like. The president also dangled the status of Robert Muellers own clearance in addition to there was an article talking about that Revoking Clearances is something that has been talked about 17 months ago. The president pushing back on that reporting. Its interesting to see how much this is now since john brennan, this is a part of what we talk about every day. Well, look, note this. Its consistent with what we know about donald trump. He does believe that theres a deep state conspiracy out to get him, that didnt want him to win in the first place and that is working to actively undermine him. Whether thats bob mueller, james comey, at times rod rosenstein, andrew mccabe, bruce ohr who he mentions regularly. He believes that. Therefore, the Security Clearance question, whether its john brennan or Michael Hayden or clapper, whoever you want, thats all of a piece with this logic, that, well, of course, these people are out to get me so i will show them. Again, even if you support President Trump, what you should consider is, would you be okay
with whoever lets say a democrat gets elected president in 2020 or 2024. Would you be okay with that person revoking, lets say, gina haskells Security Credentials because shes an yououtspoken critic . My guess is thats no. But it should be no. You make it seem so simple, chris. Thank you my friend. Thank you. We are continuing to follow Breaking News in the Paul Manafort trial. Learning more, hopefully, about this note the jury has submitted. Jessica schneider is live with the latest. Reporter a little bit of this mystery now unveiled. The jury did submit a note to the judge. We have gotten word as to what the jury wants to know. Specifically, they want to know from the judge if they cant reach a conclusion on just one count, what does that do for the other counts . Remember, there are 18 counts that Paul Manafort is facing here. This jury seems to be asking, what if we cant come to a decision or even a unanimous decision on one of those 18 counts . The jury right now along with the defense team and the prosecution, they are in this courtroom. The judge will be deciding how exactly he is going to answer this question. They have to come to a unanimous verdict on each and every count. It does remain to be seen if, perhaps, they cant reach a conclusion on one of the 18 counts, perhaps there might be a hung jury on one of those counts. Thats up to the judge to determine how to instruct them moving on. It also does sort of lead to speculation that perhaps the jury has pretty much wrapped this up on 17 of the 18 counts. This is all speculation based on that question. This jury asking the judge, what do we do if we cant figure out
one of the counts . What does it do for the other 17 counts . Erica, perhaps a lot of speculation here. Were going to learn more as this judge definitively instructs this jury as to how to proceed. They have also asked for a new verdict sheet. Presumably, they have been marking down the verdicts as to each count as they have been going. Now they want a new sheet to maybe clean things up or to redo it. A little uncertainty with this question. It seems to imply maybe they are close to a final verdict and are having trouble on one count. Perhaps we will know more as to the clarification the judge will give and what this means for the deliberations here when we hear from the judge himself. We are standing by in the courtroom. We will get back to you as to exactly what the judge says here. Again, it does give that impression that perhaps this jury is close here. Erica . It does. Jessica, we will wait for the update once we hear more from the judge inside the courtroom. Thank you. Want to bring in cnn legal
analyst paul callan. I saw you shaking your head as jessica was saying if if they are asking about one count, perhaps it could mean that the other 17 theres not an issue with. If its just one count out of 18 where they cant come to a unanimous decision, based on your experience, what could that mean to this trial as a whole . Does this end up being a hung jury on one count . It wouldnt be a hung jury on one count. The judge can call them in and just say, all right, we will take a verdict with what you have now. The judge could take a verdict on the 17 counts that they have made a decision on and send them back out only on the one that they are hung on. What that does is it would preserve the jury verdict on the 17 counts. Sometimes you are afraid they will go back in and they will start rearguing the counts where they say they have reached a decision. That would preserve the 17 and then just have them try to decide the last one. What this means is a very interesting question. My view of it is its always dangerous to speculate about this stuff. But if they have reached a decision on 17 counts, if you find somebody innocent on 17 counts, i dont know if you would be fooling around about the last count. I think you would probably find him innocent on that as well. You are saying, in your gut it feels like more probably than not, they may be looking at guilt on 17 counts and then they are having a problem with the evidence on the 18th count. As i say, this is speculation. I want to bring in evan perez, our justice reporter outside the courthouse. What more are you learning . Reporter we were inside the courtroom. The judge read the note to the both sides, to the defense and prosecution. He prepared them for what he wants do next. What he wants to do next is to give them instruction to go back and see if they can come to a decision, come to consensus on
that one count that appears one count is what they are not able to reach a decision on. Then he says he also is prepared to tell the jury that if they have only a partial verdict that he is prepared to accept that. This is something that he gave the prosecution and the defense some notice on. He wants to hear from them as to what their view is on his instructions. That is the he has given them a few minutes to go over the language that he is going to use. Essentially, he will bring back the jury. He will give them some instruction to go back and see if he had can work out a consensus on that one count that they appear to be stuck on. And then if they still cannot reach one reach a final verdict, then he will accept a partial verdict. He has said that to the courtroom. We are waiting in the next few
minutes, the Nudge Wijudge will back the jury and we will see what next steps he will provide to the jury. We will be waiting for that. We are continuing to talk more of this. As we look at this, if its just this one count as we heard from evan and the judge is saying, if you cant im sending you back in, if you cant come to a consensus on that, im going to accept what you found, on the other 17 counts, i mean, how quickly do we think we could learn what that decision is . We can learn pretty quickly here. We are learning the judge is basically having discussions with the two sides, with the prosecutors and the defense team, in terms of what kind of instruction he is going to give to the jury. It seems he is going to tell them to go ahead, go back in and continue to deliberate, to continue to work through this so they can come to a unanimous decision. The judge, according to our folks that are inside the courtroom, is saying this is very typical that this happens. Keep in mind, you have 18 counts
here. Pretty complicated legal case. The law here is complicated. Its not that easy. Its not uncommon for jurors to ask these kinds of questions. Really whats going on now, while the court is in recess, is the two sides are discussing with the judge what the instruction to the jury will be. Its likely he will just send them back in to go ahead and deliberate. What happens if they come back and they say, we have tried and we still cant come to a conclusion, a decision on this one count . Perhaps the judge will then discuss with the attorneys and they may all agree, lets take a partial verdict. The point here i think this is whats important here is that we have progress. It seems the jurors have worked through a lot of this. It seems they have at least come to some conclusions, some decisions. Now perhaps they are hung up on this one issue, this one count. Maybe we will get more news on that after the judge gives them their instruction and they go back and have lunch and continue to discuss and we will see where things progress from there. Paul call as the judge is di this with attorneys for both sides, what are the attorneys saying in that discussion . What are the cases they are making as to how the judge should proceed and what should be said . What they are discussing is something lawyers call an allen charge. Its given when a jury is deadlocked and you want to send them back out and you want to get them to try to get back to work and milwaukake a decision. They call it sometimes the dynamite charge. Theres not so much dynamite in it in my opinion. What it says essentially is, we want you to go back out and conscientiously examine your own views but compare those to the views of other jurors, be respectful of each other, try to reach a decision. If you dont reach a decision, another juror my may have to do. Thats if you had no agreement. Here you have 17 counts. I think what you are going to see is a modified allen charge. You will see a gentler approach
from the judge saying, you know, thank you for the work you have done so far. You have done a great job at reaching a conclusion. Why dont you go back out and get back to work on that last count and see if you can reach a conclusion. I think its going to be a mild instruction to them to just keep on working to resolve it. If you cant, come back, because the judge is going to take a partial verdict. He is not going to have a problem doing that. We will continue following this Breaking News. We take a quick break. When we are back, more from the courthouse where the jury is asking what happens if we cannot come to a unanimous decision on one of the 18 counts. For a single dad, and back pain made it hard to sleep and get up on time. Then i found aleve pm. The only one to combine a safe sleep aid, plus the 12 hour pain relieving strength of aleve. Im back. Aleve pm for a better am. We are following Breaking News outside live outside the courthouse where we are waiting on a verdict from the jury, day four of deliberations. They have sent a note to the judge. The fourth question they have asked. Jessica schneider is live outside the courthouse with the latest on the question and what more we can glean from it. Jessica . Reporter about an hour and a half into the Jury Deliberations today, thats right, the jury sent a note. They asked the judge, what do we do if we cant come to a unanimous decision on one of those 18 counts, how would that inability to determine that one count affect the other 17 . That is the question up to this discretion of the judge. Whats happening right now in
court is that theres a fiveminute recess. The judge is coming up with a way to explain to the jury he wants them to go back into the jury room and try yet again to come up with a unanimous decision on this one count that seems to be the one remaining count that they are having trouble with. So the judge needs both sides, the defense and prosecution, to agree on this language that he will instruct the jury with before sending them back into the room. The judge has also said that he is prepared to accept a partial verdict in this case, but he does want to have the jury go back for another try at this. So thats whats going to unfold right now. You know, the judge did say this isnt completely unusual, that these types of things happen. Tw there are 18 counts pending here. Sometimes jurors ask, what do we do if we cant come to a decision on all of the counts that were considering here . So really, this happening fairly quickly in day four of deliberations here. We saw that note on thursday where they asked the four
questions. Since then, there hasnt been any note of substantial questioning from this jury. So this is really the First Time Since thursday weve seen the jurors asking questions, showing that perhaps they have made substantial progress here but cant determine what to do about this one remaining count. So were going to see in a little bit just exactly how the judge instructs this jury and presumably that jury will go back and try again on this one count. Well see from there. It could be a while, or we might see something, some more movement today. Jessica schneider, live outside the courthouse. Also with us is shimon prokupecz. Jessica mentioned the possibility of a partial verdict. What are the judges options at this point . Thats certainly an option. Hed have to consult with the attorneys. Its more on really the Defense Attorneys side, manaforts attorneys, and what they want to do here. They can go ahead and tell the judge, okay, lets take a partial verdict here. Obviously prosecutors would have some say. Really, the person who has all the say here is the defense
team. Obviously the judge. So he could. Its likely that hes going to send them back in. In fact, thats what we believe. At least thats the indication he gave to everyone in court, that he had planned to send them back in to try and figure out this one count. We dont know which count it is. Thats the issue here. Is it the last count . Is it the first count . Of course, these kind of counts all work together, so we dont really have any understanding of what count this is. The judge seemed to think he knew what they were talking about, but he didnt want to go there. He didnt want to further prod, ask questions of the jury. When youre in such a sensitive situation like deliberations, you dont want to sway them in any way. So its clear the judge is trying to stay out of the deliberations and probably just wants to keep it very broad and just say to them, go back in, keep working, have your lunch, and lets see what happens after that. Its likely thats whats going to happen here, unless the defense team decides or argues perhaps theyll take a partial verdict here. We are all waiting with baited breath here as we wait to see what happens. Shimon, thank you. Also want to bring in cnn legal analyst paul callen. Shimon is saying unless the defense will take a partial verdict, what to you think the chances are of that . I dont really i dont know that it will be entirely up to them because if this jury comes back and says, we just cant reach a verdict on one count, traditionally the court would declare a hung jury on that count and then take the verdict on the other counts. So the defense may try to delay that and say, judge, let them go back out and continue deliberating, especially if they think the counts are not guilty counts on the first 17. Although, its interesting, as you said to me just before the break, that this says to you theres probably a better chance that it would be guilty on those other 17 counts because if youre finding someone not guilty on 17 counts, its a little easier to look at that
last charge and say, well, you know, as we look at this again. Yeah, the last they might say and its a momentum thing, all right. Youre going through all of these complicated charges. On every one you say hes innocent. Theres sort of a momentum that builds up. Then are you going to ding him just on the one last count . Because, you know, maybe its a closer call. No, i dont think so. I think most juries probably once theyre in that innocent sort of role, theyre going to just check off innocent all the way down. Thats why i think this feels like guilty on the other counts. It is so complicated. This is something you and i were talking about earlier today. In terms of how complicated each one of these charges are, how much evidence there is. What, 372 different pieces of evidence. At one point, the jury said, can you help us, remind us what goes with what. Exhibits 1 through 20 go with charge one. And the judge wouldnt do that. No, he wouldnt. You know, this is such a complex case, and it moved so quickly because judge ellis wouldnt put
up with anything delay. He pushed the case on. We have ten days of testimony, 27 witnesses, over 370 exhibits. And we have counts involving income tax evasion, bank fraud, involving offshore banks, implications with ukraine and other countries. We have an enormously complex fact pattern here. So i can see how this jury would have struggled with this complex case. And by the way, these tax cases and Money Laundering cases and bank fraud cases, theyre all very, very complicated cases. Very, very hard on juries to reach decisions. In terms of how difficult it is to sort of get all of those ducks in a row, because these are such complicated charges, are you surprised that at this point they are saying its just one charge that we cant agree on . Yeah, i am surprised. I mean, the fact theyve agreed on 17 charges is remarkable in a
complex case. Also, remember how the prosecutors thought it out in this case. This is what they frequently do, federal prosecutors. First of all, they get convictions in 90 of the cases they try. So theyre used to winning. They lined up the ostrich coat and other things that made manafort look bad, like he was spending too much money. It looks like it could be a fast verdict if they were just looking at the ostrich coach. Well all be waiting to see. Paul, appreciate it. Thank you. Stay with us. Well have the very latest on Inside Politics with john king. Stay with us on cnn. You always pay your insurance on time. Tap one little bumper and up go your rates. What good is your insurance if you get punished for using it . News flash nobodys perfect. For drivers with accident forgiveness, Liberty Mutual wont raise your rates due to your first accident. Switch and you could save 782 on home and auto insurance. Call for a free quote today. Liberty mutual insurance. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. Leave the structure, call 911, keep people away, and call pg e right after so we can both respond out and keep the public safe. Pg e wants you to plan ahead by Mapping Out Escape Routes and preparing a go kit, in case you need to get out quickly
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.