And voters were aware of some of the allegations from some of the women that are talked about, the two women that are talked about in this and we all know what michael cohen did. i think the question now, i think for the president and his legal team is how quickly do they want to go forward with this. they will file the requisite motions to dismiss. it will be interesting to see how the judge reacts. i would assume his lawyers are going to lay out that these matters were passed on by two other legal offices, including the u.s. attorney s office. i will be curious to see how this judge handles it. one thing i do hope we all are able to accept is that our judicial system works. and this judge here will have an opportunity to weigh all of these facts, to weigh the motion, which i assume mr. trump s attorneys have not consulted with me but i assume they are going to file these motions, and i expect this judge, who seems to want to move quickly, december 4th does not seem quick enough to me
Be december 4th, and that former president trump must be here in person. the defense argued, why should the former president be here in person? you can understand the undue burden that has put on the city of new york. that argument rang on deaf ears, and judge juan merchan said the former president needs to be here december 4th for the next hearing. jesse, guys? jesse: bryan, thanks so much. judge jeanine pirro, he spent time in the courtroom, how do you see things developing today? jeanine: let s start with the last thing that was just said, and that is that the defendant needs to be present on, i believe it was december 4th. if i have the date right. that is ridiculous because it is only a hearing to submit motions or to get a decision on motions. okay, it is ministerial. it is where the prosecutor, the judge, and the defense attorney get together and there is either a decision issued about the motion where there is a discussion they will argue the
Crime. i wonder, people are saying it is a federal election law, and bragg himself mentioned the new york state election law, and i wonder, no one has mentioned that. i think he was trying to give himself some wiggle room. he may not want to state what the law is to protect himself in case fulton county does something in georgia. because if he mentions it and fulton county comes out, it might be double jeopardy. i m just thinking out loud. but the vagueness is just untenable in a case involving the president of the united states, and the fact that he was arrested is disgusting. it turns us into a third world country, to bring this man, who was the leader of the free world come into a manhattan criminal courtroom, where all kinds of people come in for rape and murder and child abuse, it s offensive to me. i have been a judge, and i have been a prosecutor in these court rooms. it s to me. harold: i want to open this
Personally but i ve never seen him look that way, obvious the weight of the moment and the serious for him, you look at him and the humanity of the situation, whether you like his politics or not, you cannot help but understand what that picture connoted. jericho, i agree with the judge. new york law, as the judge knows, does not require if you cite a federal law or if you say a federal law was broken, you don t have to cite it. however, d.a. bragg should have cited with the federal law is fearful he is playing it by the book, but in light of the fact this is a former president of the united states, this is a matter on the face we believe the southern district of new york, the u.s. attorney s office passed on some of this, the former d.a. cy vance, his office passed on some of this, so i think the burden, whether it is fair or not was higher on the district attorney to lay some of these things out. now, as you read the indictment, it reads like a daytime soap opera. in so many ways,
Front-runner in 2024 for republican presidential primary, and it laid out taking a look at new hampshire registered voters. trump 42, desantis 29, everybody else who is running. they started the day with politics. he can talk about that now if he wants. i would imagine you would tell him, you would tell him as attorneys, i wouldn t talk about this case because that judge i think meant, he is waiting for the circus. you didn t bring it, but he will slap a gag order on you. so there is an opportunity tonight. i m curious to know, is he going to go this route, talk about inflation, prices, how he is going to save america. where is he going to go? i think that is the biggest part of the day. i actually was surprised by the lack of there, there in the news conference by the district attorney. who obviously was thinking he was on his come up. he was going to make it big off of this case, but then laid out the way i would as a layperson. right on the facts until we can figure out how to sell