The Special Counsel charges donald trump with conspireing to shatter the american experiment. The ha 45page indictment nar tat rates a plot to stay in power after losing an election. And it does so with some new evidence, including realtime notes from then Vice President mike pence. The politics, the third Trump Indictment slipped the field into familiar camps. The charges will also test joe bidens resolve to do what is sometimes unnatural. Stay quiet. The consequences, how the prosecution plays out in court may determine the future of both donald trump and american democracy. Im dana bash. Lets go behind the headlines and inside politics. Tomorrow a court date for the former president here in washington. Today the country gets a line by line look at The Plot Against America and the alleged crimes of donald trump. Central to the indictment is the Special Counsels assertion that trump knew that he lost the election and pushed lies to stay in office any way. Describe d in the indictment
he defamed her by denying it happened. this is moments away. we will bring it to you live here and stay with it throughout this hour. national correspondent bryan llenas is standing by at the courthouse while we wait for the news that the jurors are about to present this verdict. hi, brian. yes, i m here in new york. we have our producers at the courthouse. we re waiting now what the verdict is. it said that they would be announcing it at 3:00. we re looking to see as soon as we get the verdict what it is. in this case we need to step back here, this is a civil federal case, which means that all nine jurors must come to a unanimous decision on whether or not they believe former president trump committed assault, a battery and whether or not he defamed e. jean carroll. the burden of proof here is lower than a criminal case. you must proved beyond a reasonable doubt in this case. the only thing they have to do is convince the jury that e. jean carroll said the events more tha
dr. sanjay gupta, great to have you analyst on. we appreciate it. thanks bianna. and good morning, everybody. i m bianna golodryga. the jury in the death penalty trial of nikolas cruz, the parkland school shooter has reached a decision on whether to sentence him to death or life in prison without the possibility of parole. cnn s carlos suarez is outside of the courthouse in fort lauderdale. what more could you tell us about this? reporter: so we re expecting that the jury s verdict will be read in court at 10:30 this morning. they only spent a single day deliberating whether or not nikolas cruz is going to dry for his actions at marjorie stoneman d douglas. one of the last things they did yesterday was ask to see the ar-15 that cruz used to kill 17 people in parkland, florida. the jury s decision on death does have to be unanimous. so they all have to agree that cruz should die for these murders. if there is a holdout in my of the charges, then cruz would be essentially
hi there, everyone. it s 4:00 in new york. the ex-president turned criminal defendant and his lawyers, the prosecutors who brought the first ever criminal case against an american ex-president and indeed the entire country waiting for word from the jury in the trump election interference hush money criminal trial. in court right now, the jury is currently on its 10th hour of deliberations. the judge has said that the jury will not work past 6:00 p.m. today no matter what. if anything happens in court, we ll let you know as soon as we know. the jury spent most of their morning listening to things they have already heard before read back to them. they asked to rehear the judge s instructions regarding what inferences they can make from the evidence shown at trial. they also reviewed the testimony of michael cohen and david pecker regarding their august 2015 trump tower meeting, as well as testimony from david pecker regarding a call from donald trump at his decision to not buy
a couple of holdouts initially, and they are now of one of cord. shannon: do you think maybe they were convinced, whatever the disagreement was, if there was a disagreement, they asked for the pecker testimony and the cohen testimony, the rereading of the jury instructions, do you think the fact that we didn t hear from them again after that, that that one section or that one conflict was what they needed to get to something now? i think the jury instruction was pretty pro-prosecution. i think a lot of the evidentiary rulings were pro-prosecution. so what you are going to get with a verdict is pretty much what you ve gotten up to that point. what are the rulings? what evidence has come in? what evidence has been excluded? so the expert they never heard from. the jury is only as good as the information they are getting. shannon: well, so that gets to my question, you all having and you have handled some very high-profile cases. is there a situation when afterwards juro