>> dana: it is super interesting because the technology often gets ahead of the law. tennessee is trying to get ahead of it this time. the impact of the music industry in tennessee 62,000 jobs across the state. it is probably more than that actually. contributes almost $6 billion to the gdp and fills over 4500 music venues. i love the bluebird cafe and the listening room cafe and listen to the songwriters and i appreciate what you are doing and interesting to see if others decide to follow your lead. chris janssen, thank you. have a great day and go get that dog in the yard. take care. fox news alert happening now. the first court hearing in georgia eva's election interference case against former president trump that forced nathan wade to step aside. welcome to a new hour of "america's newsroom," i'm dana perino. >> bill: good morning. first hour is done. here we go. bill hemmer down to fulton county. the hearing marks the first time

that attorneys for the former president are back in court since the failed effort to get fani willis disqualified. the judge has allowed the defense to appeal that ruling giving them a chance to remove will ills at a later date. >> dana: the judge is forging ahead with several pre-trial motion. they say the charges should be thrown out. his political speech is protected by first amendment. >> former brett tolman but first we report the news out of fulton county. jonathan serrie. >> bill: trump attorney argues the former president's efforts to overturn his narrow election defeat in 2020 were protected political speech, including his post election phone call to georgia secretary of state. in his motion he writes quote, because the claim that the 2020 election was rigged and stolen is protected by first amendment,

when it is made in a public speech, it is equally protected by the first amendment when it is made to government officials in an act of petitioning or advocacy. but georgia state university law professor says mr. trump could run into problems if the state can prove what he said revealed or solicited illegal activity. >> walk into a bank and say stick em up. that is not protected speech. what it does is shows what your intent was, to do something unlawful. >> this is the first hearing in the georgia trump case since march 15th when special prosecutor nathan wade resigned from the case as a condition for district attorney fani willis to continue prosecuting it. the defense is expected to appeal the judge's decision not to disqualify the d.a. all together. >> we will be arguing his decision should have gone farther.

he should have actually disqualified her. he gave us the factual findings. we need a court to say that's too much, not enough. she has to be disqualified. >> dana and bill, the defense continues to allege that fani willis's former romantic involvement with nathan wade created a financial conflict of interest. back to you guys. >> bill: we'll watch it from here. thank you from atlanta. tv cameras in the courtroom. >> dana: former u.s. attorney brett tolman. listen to fani willis who says the train is coming. >> while that was going on we were writing briefs and doing the case in the way it needed to be done. we haven't been slowed down at all. there are efforts to slow down the train. but the train is coming. >> dana: size it up for us. what do you see? >> it's interesting analogy. i'm not sure whether there is an engine still attached to the train or what is going on.

look, they have a couple of issues and problems with this case. you have certainly the underlying potential investigation of fani willis herself and possibly the expenditure illegally of federal funds. i know that will continue to be something that hobbles the district attorney. think about the case itself against donald trump. i have yet to see, dana and bill, any evidence that donald trump solicited or asked an individual, whether someone that has authority in this instance, to ignore the law or to bend the law, or to outright break the law. and without that there is strength to the argument that the first amendment does protect an individual. we see politicians for decades have been claiming that elections were rigged or that they were fake or that they were going to still win and pull out the victory in this case. it is questionable what factual pattern that they are pursuing

and it seems they ignore the fact the law really does require that level of criminal intent. >> bill: they will argue two motions today. merchant is one of trump's attorneys on "fox & friends" first earlier today. here is how she laid it out and listen to what she talks about a court -- winning in a court at some point. let's watch this, ashleigh merchant from 5:50 eastern time this morning. >> if you look at that order you can tell he made some really strong factual findings that support a conflict. we'll argue that his decision actually should have gone farther and should have actually disqualified her. he gave us all the factual findings we need. we now need a court to say that's too much. that's enough. she has to be disqualified. >> bill: the line for me is we just need a court to say that's too much. when does that happen and which court does that? where could they win, if at all? >> it was doubtful that this judge, who has significant ties to the county attorney's office,

to fani willis herself, was going to actually recuse fani in this case and order the attorney general or another pick up the case. although she is accurate. the facts are there. think about this, bill. the one thing that's really puzzling. he found that there was, in fact, circumstances that justified that the prosecutor's office had been compromised. a finding they had been compromised in this particular case. that finding is always construed against the county attorney, not a contract attorney that's coming in and maybe working on the case. it is construed against the county attorney who is elected and held to a higher standard. it's the appellate court that has to review it. they are arguing he got it wrong. in his own ruling, think about this, in his own ruling he gave some premonition that he himself

was insecure about the decision arguing the law wasn't terribly clear, he could be getting it wrong. all words for an appellate court to seize on and really analyze this case in a new and probably better light than the initial district judge. >> bill: stand by a moment. want to dip in on judge mcafee's courtroom. >> first amendment analysis of this. >> it's true federal courts, kind of all over the place. some courts explicitly stay away from it. other courts go into it. we know in this defendant's case in d.c. the judge went forward and made an analysis based on the allegations in the indictment there. not every court does. some federal courts stay away from it for a specific reason. there are allegations that have to be settled for a jury. >> you are looking at all the cases that you found, ones that didn't do it and generally they

say we don't have the facts. were there any that said even thief i could look solely at the indictment i will not do a challenge. >> it's a case you cited in october when you ruled we're not going to get into it. >> you are talking about. >> the major case, the georgia case. the major case is where they say okay, this is a pre-trial as applied first amendment challenge. what this boils down to is an argument about intent. when you look at what the defendant wants to argue about here today it is saying i was talking -- i was just advocating, just speaking my mind and it is protected and therefore the entire thing has to go away. >> that is your strongest argument in the analysis as the as applied challenge. i'm trying to really understand the procedural element of it. >> and what major says, because

that intent question has yet to be answered and the jury is the entity that answers that question, it is pre-mature to consider this. you can't say the first amendment has been applied or that as applied challenge can succeed because there are still questions that need to be answered. >> major was over breadth. >> did theysy premature or denied? >> they cannot say it is unconstitutional under the first amendment as applied to the defendant in that scenario because there are still intent questions that -- >> does that suggest then that they did do as an as-applied challenge. hard for a defendant to win that. all you have is the indictment. >> that's a way you could interpret it. it would suggest an as-applied challenge cannot succeed under the first amendment because speech integral in criminal conduct is not protected. well pleaded indictment will say

that speech that is pled as part of a criminal charge is criminal conduct. there is nothing to decide. if you are looking at the indictment. we have two routes here. neither of them result in the grant of this motion. one says the court says this is premature, questions that have to be answered. any first amendment challenge has to happen after a factual record to look to. the other says i can get to this today. not that i can't. i can but there is nowhere to go. all the speech is pled as integral to criminal conduct and not protected. >> bill: you could envision an indictment. i don't know in alvarez -- you could envision an indictment where perhaps they drafted it to solely target speech because of its falsity or something like that. maybe there is a use for an as-applied challenge in that kind of situation. >> a fair point. it's not the situation here and won't be the situation in almost any case. that was a special case with a unique statue. that was a challenge.

they were saying this is just punishing for falsity. none of the charges in this case are about that. they are about falsity employed as part -- statements employed as part of a pattern of criminal conduct in numerous ways. there is nowhere to go and so i think it requires dismissal or denial at this stage because you either can't reach it because there are facts that have to be established or the indictment establishs that none of these speech is protected by the first amendment. the inquiry immediately ends. >> all right. so back to you. let's move forward with the idea that we are making an as-applied challenge solely confined to the indictment. you aren't saying any of the statutes are on its face unconstitutional and your argument is that this is core political speech. >> correct. >> so some crimes can be achieved solely through speech,

though. terrorist threats, you know. solicitation. why is that not what's happening here as alleged? >> well, i think it requires kind of a detailed analysis. if i may, to the first thing we have to decide is whether or not -- we are talking about president trump. we're not talking about the actions of others. we have to look and see whether or not that which has been alleged as facts is, in fact, political speech, political discourse, protected speech. i don't think there is any question that statements, comments, speech, expressive conduct that deals with campaigning or elections has always been found to be at the zenith of protected speech. what do we have here? we have election speech. so one must determine

immediately whether that constitutes core political speech. i suggest that it does. now, does that make a difference ultimately? yes, because the more core speech, the more it is protected, the less the government should be involved in restricting it. i don't think there is any real doubt about that. so then the question becomes, is the mere fact that the state here represents that it is false or fraudulent under the statute, is that enough? now from what i just heard i think the state's position would be yes. all we have to do is say it's false, it's integral to criminal conduct, it's fraud, and therefore it can't be unconstitutional as applied. i don't believe that's what the law says. i think what the law really looks at is as to each individual application of a

statute, whether or not the falsity in and of itself alone is sufficient. i think the case law indicates that that's not so, particularly -- i don't need to go back in detail everything that alvarez said but i think it is in court because even when you talk in terms of -- i'll start with -- we're looking at the majority. actually i guess it would be the plurality opinion by judge kennedy but for purposes of interest to us, the chief justice and justice sotomayor agree. now we're talking about two people still on the court. i'm looking specifically at page

723 in which the court goes on to say were the court to hold the interest in truthful discourse alone is sufficient to sustain a ban on speech absent any evidence that the speech would be used to gain a material advantage, it would give government a broad power unprecedented in this court's cases or in our constitutional tradition. so that's the beginning part of plurality saying the way to attack all speech or false political speech or core speech is with truth. which is precisely what was going on. we are talking about this time period without getting outside the indictment, you are talking about at the same time the allegations are being made, factual allegations in the indictment, you have others that are fighting that off. the government's position would be the state's position with truth. moving beyond alvarez, that part

of it. you have justice kagan and justice breyer. here i think gets to the crux of where we are. this is the other opinion. it goes through a litany of false statement cases in which the government's position in alvarez is being false and of itself is enough. that is once you determine it's false, we're done. that's not what the concurrence says and not what the dissent says. the concurrence says basically that these judicial statements cannot be read to mean no protection at all. false factual statements can serve useful human objectives in social context where they may prevent embarrassment, et is a.

in public and technical, scientific and philosophical context where examination or false statement, even if made deliberately to mislead, can promote a form of thought that ultimately helps realize the truth. and then it goes on and says even a false statement may be deemed to make a valuable contribution to public debate since it brings about the clear perception and lively tradition of truth. this is the proposition it is not the falsity alone that controls, it is the context in which the speech is made. and if it is seen false and for purposes of the indictment, we have to assume that it is false because that's what the facts have been alleged. that doesn't mean it is the end of the analysis. >> why don't we also have to

assume -- >> bill: they are arguing whether or not you can criminalize political speech? do i have that right? >> you do have that right. but the strength of the d.a.'s argument is actually that this is premature and why the criminal law is so difficult to bring a motion to dismiss. it is not set up to handle these kinds of motions very well. what you have is an opportunity for a grand jury to review a case, issue an indictment. if that indictment is issued, the process for dismissal would come after the evidence is presented. that's the difficulty that trump's lawyers are finding themselves in now is that historical and precedent, you know, has always been that criminal law waits until the facts are flushed out. it is not fair in a lot of instances because the power of the prosecutor is so substantial they can pursue charges knowing

they don't necessarily have the facts to back them up but you don't get your opportunity to argue that most often until the facts have been presented. >> bill: so david schaefer is involved in this and audience is not familiar with him. he was the georgia republican party chair during 2020 and he was arguing that he could replace the electors and he was challenging that in court. if i have that right, if i don't, please correct me. but wasn't that what ronna mcdaniel was arguing on "meet the press" this past sunday in the state of michigan? what she was saying is that they had a legal challenge in michigan as well to challenge the electors in that state. is it apples to apples? >> well, it is, bill. i found it fascinating that the county attorney, you may have heard him make reference to the pattern, the pattern is the part of the racketeering charge, a

pattern of corruption or criminal activity that has to be presented. he is throwing that in because the indictment itself is incredibly weak in terms of its treatment of a pattern of criminal behavior. when you have, you know, folks like ronna or you have in georgia and other states you have individuals suggesting that the electors need to be replaced, that they don't have it right. there is fraud that has occurred, i mean then they challenge it in court. that's very difficult to say that's a pattern of corruption or criminal activity when they are doing it through the court system. >> bill: stand by. we'll squeeze in a quick commercial break and take the viewers back inside the courtroom when we continue. i was on a journey for a really long time to find some relief. cosentyx works for me. cosentyx helps real people get real relief from the symptoms of psoriatic arthritis or psoriasis. serious allergic reactions, severe skin reactions that look like eczema, and an increased risk of infections,

some fatal, have occurred. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine or plan to or if ibd symptoms develop or worsen. i move so much better because of cosentyx. ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx. at ameriprise financial our advice is personalized based on your goals, whatever they may be. all that planning has paid off. looks like you can make this work. we can make this work. and the feeling of confidence that comes from our advice... i can make this work. that seems to be universal. i can make this work. i can make this work. no wonder more than 9 out of 10 clients are likely to recommend us. because advice worth listening to is advice worth talking about. ameriprise financial.

voices of people with cidp: cidp disrupts. cidp derails.

let's be honest... all: cidp sucks! voices of people with cidp: but living with cidp doesn't have to. when you sign up at shiningthroughcidp.com, you'll find inspiration in real patient stories, helpful tips, reliable information, and more. cidp can be tough. but finding hope just got a little easier. sign up at shiningthroughcidp.com. all: be heard. be hopeful. be you.

here's why you should switch fo to duckduckgo on all your devie duckduckgo comes with a built-n engine like google, but it's pi and doesn't spy on your searchs and duckduckgo lets you browse like chrome, but it blocks cooi and creepy ads that follow youa from google and other companie. and there's no catch. it's fre. we make money from ads, but they don't follow you aroud join the millions of people taking back their privacy by downloading duckduckgo on all your devices today.

>> bill: they still continue to argue political speech in georgia. we'll get you headlines out of fulton county and see whether or not the case moves today. a couple things we want to get to. >> dana: check this out in chicago. soft on crime policies under fire once again. police say an 11-year-old boy was stabbed to death by a dangerous criminal who had been out on a role for less than 24 hours. alexis mcadams has the latest for us. >> what a horrible story for this family in chicago that deadly decision to release this suspect back onto the streets into the windy city was made by illinois's prison review board. that board is handpicked by democratic governor pritzker now under fire for making the decision after the perp was out for a matter of hours before he killed this 11-year-old boy. look on the screen. this is the photo provided by the family here as they continue to grieve this loss. that is 11-year-old jayden

perkins stabbed to death by a criminal who broke into his chicago home. the 11-year-old was killed trying to protect his pregnant mom from her violent ex boyfriend. he wasn't out of prison for 24 hours before police say he broke into that home, armed with a knife and attacked the family. stabbing the child and his pregnant mom who is expected to be okay. this murder happened while brand was on parole serving half of his 16 year prison sentence for home invasion. last month he was taken back to prison after he threatened per kin's mom. one day after he got out again he killed her son. chicago's top cop says this should have been avoided. >> my feeling is that he should not have been. he violated parole. he violated an order of protection and it involved the same type of crime that he was paroled for. this is someone who should not have been on the street. >> that deadly decision to

release him made by the prison review board picked by pritzker. he admits the suspect's case was not given the careful consideration needed before he was set free and earlier this week both the chair and a member of that parole board have resigned. back live it is not enough for the family of this 11-year-old boy. they want to know why he was let out when he continued to violate parole. the governor in illinois calling for a review of the board's domestic violence policies. >> dana: that is a terrible story and one that happens over and over. thank you for bringing us the news. >> bill: another courtroom. a day of reckoning for the crip some kid sam bankman-fried expected to get his sentence today facing the potential of decades in prison. his parents went into court an hour ago. with me now is kevin o'leary, chairman of o'leary ventures. you were a victim of the crypto kid. what is stunning to me, i don't

know how much you had there. you actually -- he will go to jail. but your investment could actually be made whole. how is that possible? >> yes, it is a remarkable situation. the way you can see the value of these claims. anybody that has an account and properly filed a claim. basically all the accounts were swept clean and nothing in it. we had records of what was held there prior to the collapse of ftx. each month over the last year the hedge fund markets that fund these claims, in other words i could sell my claim for $0.82, $0.88, $0.90, etc. , as we get closer. because bitcoin has had such dramatic rises in value. many claims will be made close to whole or better than whole, it is extraordinary. remember, we were looking for $7 billion. looks like it has been found. there is precedence to this. many of the claimants in the

madoff case were made close to whole and looks like it will happen in the ftx case as well. >> bill: it's up five times in a year, the etf or bitcoin. the people involved in this, not just yourself but he was giving money to joe biden, bill clinton and larry david, shaquille o'neal were all sucking up to him. why did they think he was such a genius? >> remember his parents who you showed going into court. compliance lawyers at sandford. an american citizen running an american exchange at the time when crypto had so much promise in 2021. all the crypto cowboys and him next month cz will be sentenced, there is another person that is being held and extradited to south korea of the u.s. all the founders of crypto now

has arrows in their backs. now a new generation that is compliant. this purge, if you want to call it that, is important to advance the technology. i'm an investor in the compliance exchanges. they are next. all the assets are moving onto the compliant exchanges and the ftxs are gone. it is sad for them, but these pioneers sacrificed their lives and they're gone. they did the things they did. it was unnecessary to do that stuff but the promise of crypto remains by fact that as we speak, we have a $70,000 bitcoin. >> bill: remarkable turn around. the defense wants five or six. prosecution 40 to 50. see what the judge decides. thank you for coming on today. good to see you. >> dana: fox news alert here. new york police honoring one of their own as mourners gather for

the wake of murdered officer jonathan diller. former president trump will be among those paying respects. ren. yay - woo hoo! ensure, with 27 vitamins and minerals, nutrients for immune health. and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. (♪) do you have a life insurance policy you no longer need? now you can sell your policy - even a term policy - for an immediate cash payment. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized we needed a way to supplement our income. if you have $100,000 or more of life insurance, you may qualify to sell your policy. don't cancel or let your policy lapse without finding out what it's worth. visit coventrydirect.com to find out if your policy qualifies. or call the number on your screen. coventry direct, redefining insurance. i feel refreshed because i am not struggling with cpap anymore. she looks great. i got inspire. great sleep at the click of a button. did she get implants?

yeah, i got an implant, sheila!! it's inspire. learn more and view important safety information at inspiresleep.com [♪] there's a way to cut your dishwashing time by 50%. try dawn powerwash dish spray. it removes 99% of grease and grime in half the time. it cleans so well, you can replace multiple cleaning products. try dawn powerwash.

>> he died doing what he loved. i will forever -- forever be a better person because of him. >> bill: emotions running high in new york city. former president donald trump and president joe biden will be in town today at the same time for very different reasons. trump attends a wake for murdered nypd officer jonathan diller. biden is doing a fundraiser at radio city music hall with obama and clinton. the events creating a dramatic split screen. trump team saying the invitation to attend the wake moved the former president. diller was is shot and killed by a career criminal arrested 21 times. shot in the stomach beneath his kevlar vest during a routine

traffic stop. leaves behind a wife and 1-year-old son. you can donate at a gofundme page for a link on the screen for his family that we'll share with you. >> does the president have dementia? >> that's an offensive question to ask. >> how does mr. biden win votes when people don't have dispose ashley income? >> both costs have gone down because of what this president has been able to do. with that thank you so much, have an amazing day. >> wow. she hung up. >> dana: the white house denying karine jean-pierre hung up on my next guest during an interview. mark garrison, radio host and news director at wbt charlotte. >> i got a call from the white house and said she had an availability on tuesday morning, would like to talk about the president's visit here in north carolina and would i be interested in talking to her.

i said sure. that's how it happened. >> dana: do you think anybody at the white house has ever listened to your show or your station? >> you know, that's a really good question. i mean, at night you can pick us up all the way from canada to cuba as we like to say. but yeah, my best guess is probably not. >> dana: the white house deputy press secretary says this is a manufactured controversy, that she often has back-to-back interviews and apparently how she ends other interviews. i don't know if that measures up. from your perspective do you think she hung up on you after you asked about the dementia question? >> there is no question in my mind she hung up. look, i've done lots of these kinds of interviews before where people are on a tight schedule. when you run out of time they simply say look, i'm sorry, i have to go and have a nice day and a quick goodbye, thank you very much. none of that. it was have a wonderful day,

click. >> dana: 86% of people in the abc poll we had four weeks ago said that they think the president is too old to run for re-election. then it's around 60 to 65% of people say he doesn't have the mental acuity to be president again. so i don't think the question is out of bounds. are you surprised they don't have a better answer? >> i really am. the fact that she -- what surprised me was she said she was so offended by the question. you were in the white house and you understand what it is like to have talking points but also prep for interviews. the fact that it almost caught her by surprise, i was stunned by that really. >> dana: listen to this. a montage of voters struggling with higher prices. listen. >> it's hard. it's very hard especially for people that don't have that extra income. are you going to eat this week or are you going to save money

to pay rent? $ >> it's not even two weeks of groceries. >> dana: it's not a stretch to say people are worried about food prices. my final question to you is the reason biden had his press secretary doing media in north carolina is because they think it is a swing state. they want to try to win it and you tell me, what are the chances right now of biden winning north carolina in a re-election effort in 2024? >> well, the latest polling here shows trump running about 2% ahead. there is another poll that gives him 3%. a third of the voters here in north carolina are independents or unaffiliated. so they are the swing votes. at this point, i think trump can pull it out, although it is interesting four years ago he only beat biden by two percentage points. it will be close again, but i think he certainly can pull it out.

>> dana: mark garrison, thank you for being on the show today. we'll have a nice sign-off, goodbye. >> bill: fulton county inside the courthouse making the case before the judge. the trump team is trying to argue two motions and see whether or not they are successful coming up momentarily. fox news inside a pennsylvania ammo factory playing a key role in ukraine's defense. what happens to the production when the money runs out from washington? we will take you there to get that answer. i knew i was interested in working with students who were easily excluded. part of my journey is responding to looks. we have to look out for each other. we have to take care of each other. dance is my safe space. i am autistic and i am a performer. and i'm really good at it. once we're in our own space and we get to create that space, it's really fun. i am here because i have seen women do it. if you can see her, you can be her. i love your dress. oh thanks!

i splurged a little because liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. that's great. i know, right? i've been telling everyone. baby: liberty. did you hear that? ty just said her first word. can you say “mama”? baby: liberty. can you say “auntie”? baby: liberty. how many people did you tell? only pay for what you need. jingle: ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ baby: ♪ liberty. ♪ uuu, this looks romantic. [bell sounds] welcome, i'm your host, jacob. hi. how was the weather getting up here? fine but, you know, i think we're, we're just going to go up to bed and— do you believe in ghosts? [whistling kettle sound] no? good! mother is buried in the yard. meanwhile, at a vrbo... when other vacation rentals have no privacy, try one that has no one but you.

i hear it all the time. people tell me they'd love to buy gold. but because it's gold - they think it must be complicated. it isn't. not with rosland capital. with rosland... the entire process from start to finish is built on one concept... one... keep... it... simple. rosland capital - a trusted leader in helping people acquire precious metals. gold bullion, lady liberty gold and silver proofs, and our premium coins, can help you preserve your wealth. call rosland capital at 800-630-8900

to receive your free rosland guide to gold, gold & precious metals ira, and silver brochures. with rosland, there are no hassles, no gimmicks, and our shipping is fast and reliable. remember. keep it simple. make gold your new standard. call rosland capital today at 800-630-8900, 800-630-8900. that's 800-630-8900.

here's why you should switch fo to duckduckgo on all your devie duckduckgo comes with a built-n engine like google, but it's pi and doesn't spy on your searchs and duckduckgo lets you browse like chrome, but it blocks cooi and creepy ads that follow youa from google and other companie. and there's no catch. it's fre. we make money from ads, but they don't follow you aroud join the millions of people taking back their privacy

by downloading duckduckgo on all your devices today. >> bill: 14 before hour. inside court in fulton county, the attorney on behalf of the former president donald trump arguing about first amendment rights, free speech rights in the georgia rico case. judge janine pirro will take us

through this. good morning to you. we've been watching and listening trying to read the tea leaves on behalf of the judge because fani willis is still on the case, nathan wade is off. does the trump team stand a chance of winning this? >> actually i think they do. basically the argument that's being made today is that the allegations in the indictment really reflect nothing more than first amendment speech and that is basically the core of the indictment. and if you are engaging in first amendment political speech, it doesn't make it criminal simply because they want to bootstrap that to something that isn't a crime already. so by saying that, you know, this defendant, donald trump, committed a crime by arguing political speech, you have no underlying crime. political speech doesn't create the crime. you will remember that the judge dismissed six of the counts already because there was an insufficiency of the indictment.

that's what they are saying now. it is not particular enough and insufficient and if you read it word for word it is nothing more than protected political speech. there is certain speech not protected yelling fire in a crowded room or child pornography, that kind of thing. this is core political speech. does he have a chance? it depends on the judge. i don't know if he has that much strength. i know his election is coming up soon. the fact that he threw off nathan wade and not fani willis when she is the one who brought him in. engaged in the relationship and gave him the money and lied about it and still on tells me mcafee doesn't have the nerve to do it. >> dana: she seems so empowered. peacocking around there. i want to ask you about a bigger picture about the politics of it all. president trump will be in new york today going to attend the funeral service of the fallen officer from the nypd.

president biden is doing a fundraiser that was long planed and they'll raise $25 million. one of the things i'm curious about is just even the court of public opinion. when you have president trump having to deal with all of these legal issues while joe biden can have his team say he has been to every swing state since the state of the union, and the contrast and yet president trump still has been able to maintain -- it has come down a little bit. a lead ahead of joe biden in the swing states. >> former president trump has more energy, more stamina, and more backbone than i think any president we've ever seen in the country before. joe biden can say we went to all the swing states. i don't know what he did there. if he spokes to people in more than a room with more than 20 people. it doesn't matter. but i think the bigger juxtaposition is that joe biden is raising money and donald trump today is with the family of officer diller, the fallen police officer.

he shouldn't have died and been killed. you have a criminal with 21 arrests, nine felony arrests, two state prison stints and the other driver is convicted of attempted murder and out on bail. this is all the politicians and democrats who want bail, social justice and don't care about funding police. this is what we're seeing. this juxtaposition of trump versus biden today is classic in terms the of what is going on in the underbelly of this country. >> bill: the chief senior d.a. in fulton county working for anti-corruption in the d.'s office. i a clip of him going after the former president. >> he was just a guy asking questions. and not someone who was part of an overarching criminal conspiracy trying to overturn election results for an election he did not win by violating the rico statute and making false

statements to the government and filing false documents and impersonating officers and doing a whole host of other activity that is harmful, in addition to the falsity of the statements employed to make them happen. so i think there has been a suggestion that your honor can reframe what you are looking at. >> bill: that's the state's case. >> it is weak because he isn't saying what the president actually did. what he actually said. is the questioning of the election results illegal now all of a sudden? you can take a case to the supreme court question it but you can't ask it in the state of georgia. no free speech if this case goes. >> dana: great to see you. we have a special on fox nation about the menendez brothers. >> amazing case, monsters or misunderstood? we know after o.j. they were looking for a conviction in california. what is incredible about this is that the judge precluded evidence of these brothers being

sexually molested by their father. they had a reason and i think it will be overturned, i do. >> dana: watch that on fox nation and see you on "the five." we'll be right back. >> tech: at safelite, we'll take care of fixing your windshield. but did you know we can take care of your insurance claim? that means less stress for you. >> woman: thanks. >> tech: my pleasure. have a good one. >> woman: you too. >> tech: schedule today at safelite.com. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ what if there is an investment strategy, a product, where your retirement money and investment portfolio could go up with the stock market lock in your gains? and when the market goes down, you don't lose anything. forward with your money. never backwards would have that investment

strategy, that product actually existed? good news! it does! if you have at least $100,000 to invest, get your investor's guide and see if it's right for you.

hey. you seein' this? wait... where's the dish? there ain't one. you're tellin' me you can get directv — the good stuff — and you don't need a satellite dish? oh, i used to love doin' my business on those things! you're one sick pigeon. them dishes kept the rain off our beaks! we just have different priorities is all. satellite-free directv... never thought i'd see the day. well, our lifespans are quite short... stream directv without a satellite dish.

i'm going to do this thing with my neck, just for a bit.

>> dana: one of the most important munitions of the ukraine war comes from an historic factory in pennsylvania. tons of steel to make artillery shells. the u.s. can't seem to produce fast enough. steve harrigan is in scranton, pennsylvania to check it out. >> that factory is right behind me. they make a very old-fashioned weapon, 155 millimeter artillery shell six inches around and producing as many as possible could be the key to winning the war in ukraine. inside that factory it's really

a mix of old and new. you see workers some of their parents worked there and grand parents. they take measurements by hand but also there are robotic arms that heat the steel to 2,000 degrees and fashion it into a shell. the big problem in the ukraine war is that russia is firing 10,000 of these shells every day at ukraine. ukraine can fire back 2,000. the huge russian advantage is tilting the battlefield in russia's favor. >> the ukrainians are not running out of courage. they are running out of ammunition. >> u.s. army is trying to change that. they are pumping $4 hundred million into this factory. their goal is to triple production by the end of the year. dana, back to you. >> dana: thank you for the update. >> bill: interesting story. >> dana: can you make enough for them and us? >> bill: just those numbers, 10,000 this way, 2,000 that way

every day. >> dana: it has been on my mind ever since the reagan defense forum. >> bill: heart warm moment on the pitch we say. the new york red bulls playing a rainy game in new jersey. some players giving coats to kids out there to support them. in return the team beat miami 4-0. nicely done. he gives his jacket and says you, young man, are now protected from the elements. >> dana: it's unusual for miami to lose by that much. i thought you meant for opening day where there is a pitch. all right. "the faulkner focus" is next. here she is. >> harris: any minute now immigration and customs enforcement or ice is set to give an update on deporting illegal border crossers. what's their plan? our entire nation is the victim of biden's ope