deliver remarks without making these big gaps and maybe he is not the 1 fully in charge of what he's doing every day. >> while it says pause all the time in there are you think toshi think he would've noticed it all up at, you know, as you say kevin here at a differently from the room and it's a very tight race so we will sea where it goes. my punker says it is goodbye. goodbye. thank you guys. great to sea you all. [ laughter ] >> martha: that's the story for thursday. thank you for joining us today. we been another busy day tomorrow. stay tuned, your world starts tomorrow. not a great day for the dow. that's where we will sea former president donald trump come out and speak in a few moments. stay tuned for that at the new york state supreme court, dueling courts today. more to come tomorrow. we will sea you then. 's v. >> more on that in a moment not that. day 7 on trial for trump we are

live in new york where today's session is expected to wrap shortly. the former president is expected to emerge from the courtroom and make remarks when he does we martha: are there. the former national enquirer publisher david pecker on the stand and now being questioned by the trump legal team. earlier he detailed a phone call he had with the former president about payments made to karen mcdougal. he claimed trump was upset that stormy daniels broke in agreement not to use his name. and welcome everyone and sandra smith and for neil cavuto, this is your world. it's a busy day in the trump legal world we've got you covered with fox team coverage. nate foy on the new york trial of what's going on inside the courtroom right now. are legal eagles jonathan and andy mccarthy, katie czajkowski are here. we begin with nate in new york. hague nate. >> reporter: hey sandra. you mention the cross-examination of former american media ceo and resident david packer underway trump's

lawyers asking him about his dealings with the former president but the timeline dates back to long before he was running for office or was present of the united states. 's lawyers notably brought up an interaction the 2 had from 1988 when becker notified trump about a negative story coming from an actress at the time. trump's lawyers establishing they had this business relationship that was mutually beneficial for years and packer has testified today that it was good for his business to run positive stories about the former president donald trump. right now he is also discussing his dealings with other celebrities including arnold shorts and egg are and paying to suppress stories, specifically from women alleging improper conduct with him and also purchasing stories from tiger woods or about tiger woods as

well. this comes after the direct examination wrapped up of david packer and he was asked 1 was last time he spoke to the former president donald trump and he replied that winter of 2019 and the da's office prosecutor asked him if he had any negative feelings about former president truck and he said it was actually the opposite. he said trump was his mentor who helped him a lot throughout his career. he also referenced a nonprosecution agreement that ami entered with the southern district of new york about campaign finance violations and in the agreement he talked about the meeting at trump tower in 2015 when he entered an agreement with trump and cohen to suppress negative stories about trump and publish negative stories about trump's political opponents which at the time included bill and hillary clinton as well as republican candidates in the primary race. he also discussed a conciliation

agreement with the federal election commission and it was his agreement that ami received a fine and agreed not to contest that it committed campaign violations. so that's the latest right now from david packer's testimony as i can right now trump's lawyers are having their opportunity to ask him about the relationship after the da's office concluded their opportunity. back to you sandra. >> we expected here from former president donald trump shortly, joining us former u.s. attorney and fox news contributor andy mccarthy, george washington university professor and fox news contributor jonathan turley and former prosecutor katie trish caskey. andy let's start with you. as we await the remarks from former president donald trump what do you believe is the strategy now other cross-examination happening and that courtroom? >> evidently what they returned

to underscore based on the reporting rear hearing is that these agreements, these nondisclosure agreements are legal, they are a staple civil settlements in the u.s. and they go on all the time and they are not criminal and it will build from that to the ultimate argument that not only are they not criminal, trump actually is in charge with them in the indictment. >> interesting pair jonathan when the former president emerges from that courtroom i can only imagine what he will have to say. but at this point based on what we a commode of the courtroom do you believe you will look at this as of the day or a bad day? >> i think he should look at it as a good day. if this is what they thought was their strongest start pack this is particularly good. becker described how he asked trump about the reimbursement of cohen and trump said i don't know anything about that. more importantly you now have

the defence pointing out he did the same thing for other celebrities. the point is that trump was and is a celebrity. he had a hit show on television and that was really good for the magazine. packer himself said i had a couple different motivations here because this is what my readers wanted as well. nonevent makes a particularly good case for anything criminal but what is still missing is the fact he just described in the same thing for celebrities because there's nothing illegal in it. thank illegal having an nda. you can object to and not like the underlying story cart but it's not a campaign contribution. the federal government itself made that clear. >> martha: katie? >> i definitely agree that the first witness should definitely be the strongest witness. packer's testimony did nothing to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. in fact even said he assumed trump wanted the stories killed

for the purposes of his campaign but he didn't have any direct evidence of it. an assumption is a far cry beyond a reasonable doubt proof that was the sole motivation behind these lawful agreements. certainly i don't know what kind of ground they gained with him aside from the fact establishing there were many conversations with michael cohen that seemed to be coordinating this on behalf of term. again we don't know if he was aware of what cohen was relaying and claiming trump new. that's certainly something up for debate. >> alright i want to take our viewers and listeners through something that just came to us from the courtroom and get your response to it. as the packer testimony is ongoing at this hour. this is the common -- cross-examination it's happening, when it comes to this august when he 15 meeting attorney 23 packer testified the wrong date of the meeting and prosecutors had to correct and. just reading this as it's coming out of the courtroom to us.

the trump attorney conduct and the cross-examination right now is pushing packer to make him question his memory and different series of events. that trump lawyer is asking when the most recent meeting packer had with prosecutors, packer said to her 3 weeks ago and he said he had probably 5 meetings total with prosecutors. he seemed flustered and can't remember specifics saying i don't have my calendar in front of me. the trump attorney then said it's hard to remember the dates of these things even when they happened just a few months ago. what's your take away from that exchange and equally. >> it's a pretty standard line of cross-examination sandra where once the witness is given a version of events it's helpful to the government or at least the state believes it is helpful

that you poke holes in it and it's defence council by showing that lois's -- the witness is not as sure as they seem to perhaps on cross-examination, may be the credibility is not as high as you might have expected. the thing i would hesitate about here is i actually think packer on balance is a good witness for trump khaki is clearly not a hostile witness. and you need to make some points about his memory, maybe that helps in something you want to say at the end of the case. summation to the jury that's fine. i would not cross the line and turn him into a hostile witness or get his backup because i think he is more inclined to help trump that harm him. >> martha: dew you agree with that? >> i think he is right on. this guy has a gun to his head. in agreement that he is signed and he doesn't want to be there. you don't want to give him a

motivation here. but a think their scorned points and right now which also goes to what's going to happen in 18 minutes. there is a danger to sort of caging him in that courtroom, not able to speak. i thank the other side is hoping that he will come out and vent. but what we are seeing in packer is how weak this case is. it's almost in copperhead civil. the president needs not to rehabilitate their case or give them anything with statements made outside the courtroom. 's case is collapsing on its own wait. it also means the president himself should not take the stand in this case. it's such a weak case that he would be given the prosecutors a possible opportunity that they would not otherwise have. >> martha: katie perhaps the tory and things, do you agree with jonathan that at this point with the big decision before him, the former president should not take the stand in his own

defence? >> i do agree that it would be vary risky for him with the rulings allowing an all these other bindings and other civil cases. it would simply attack his credibility and a way that's not necessary and open him up in a way that's really not needed for the defence at this point. the case is very weak, it's obvious why originally in this case was not seen as the first to go but practical matters it was the only 1 that could proceed. it's a real risk for them and not shaping up to be an example of any criminal conduct its more confusing by the day. >> we will continue to lean on any updates from that courtroom, likely we will have court rubbing for the day shortly and the former president his team said earlier he is expected to emerge from the courtroom and speak to the cameras. we will have that for our viewers with a thank you to all 3 of you for joining us. >> thank you.

>> a quick look as promised at the court at wall and brought. if you can stomach it it was a pretty big loss for the dow 375 points down on the day. stocks selling off during the first 3 month of the year. professors also considered over persistent inflation pushing a possible rate cuts from the fed. we will be watching. you are looking live now that the supreme court, a big day as well where former president donald trump said he would prefer to be there today as his immunity cases wait. but would he have liked what he heard? and were waiting as i mentioned donald trump for his remarks want this -- once this court session wraps. stay with us progressive makes it easy to save with a quick commercial auto quote online. so you can get back to your monster to-do list. -really? -get a quote at progresivecommercial.com.

>> are you satisfied with the results you get from expensive nutritional supplements that don't contain more than 12 minerals? you can't get much benefit from 8 to 10 minerals when your body needs at least 60 minerals to be healthy. now, try immuno 150 with its 70 minerals and 80 other nutrients. i'm elmer heinrich, celebrating my 90th birthday as i make this commercial, with no dementia, no health problems, aches, or pains of any kind and the flexibility i had when i was 60. now, i have consumed immuno 150 for many years. i can still drive a golf ball 220 yards, work out, bench press 100 pounds, run, jump, and do about anything i did 30 years ago. now, i know it's because of the 70 minerals. now, look at the two videos on our website listed on the screen and consider placing an order online or call our toll-free number.

and, by all means check the number of minerals in the product you take. i know you can be just as sharp and as healthy as i am and in as good of shape when you are 90 years old if you consume a full spectrum of minerals every day. the 70 minerals are the key, order now.

e former president donald trump is expected to speak in a moment now as the court session wraps. earlier today he said he would've been love to be inside the supreme court today as the justices weighed his immunity case but would he have liked what he heard from them today are not? are chief legal correspondent and host of fox news sunday shannon broome hello shannon. >> hello sandra good to sea.

right former president donald trump was not in the courtroom but jack smith was. the entire council team as well. you look like it is related to january 6th and today the argument was the allegations they make about the actions he took surrounding generally sixth are they subject to some kind of broad grant of presidential immunity against potential criminal liability? the justices had all kinds of quarries looking far beyond the case and thinking about how it would impact generations to come. at 1 point saying we are writing a rule for the ages, they get the historical impact on the job they will have to do with this particular case. worrying in a contentious election cycle the person who loses would immediately have to worry about their opponent tried to put them in jail if they're an incumbent who lost a reelection bid. but just as jackson was on the other side saying i'm worried about the court getting a sweeping grant of criminal immunity to any sitting president so that when he leaves he knows there is not going to

be a liability. this is what she responsible and than seeking the office in our land. >> once we say no criminal liability mr president you can do whatever you want, i am worried that we would have a worse problem then the problem of the president feeling constrained to follow the law while he is in office. >> 's are your present trump's argument saying if i don't have immunity and the president doesn't have the protection they can do their job and make difficult decisions. the justices said that's how we've been doing a couple centuries now, they question that. also the question came up about pardoning the presidents and why wouldn't they in the waning days of their administration if they are worried about it simply part of themselves against any future potential criminal charges, it's not a question the supreme court has answered either. now we will wait to see how long it takes them to get to a decision on this case sandra. >> and said now i appreciated shannon. let's get to read from the

former clerk for justice clarence thomas and constitutional law professor don i thought there was so many fascinating exchanges inside the supreme court today listening to the arguments really opens up to the country to hear how they take this all in and make their decisions. what was your take away? what struck you as you listened to the justices and their questioning? >> centre i couldn't agree more hope americans ascend to the argument because they will learn the justices are considering not how this affects donald trump in particular about how this will affect the office of the presidency and all future presidents. i heard only 3 justices, 3 liberal justices reject the idea of any immunity at all. the 6 other conservative justices from what i heard were trying to struggle with the idea

of how we would construct the immunity, what it would look like and what kind of acts would be subject to it and what kinds wouldn't. chi would say the bottom line here is that donald chung has an incredible day at the supreme court. way better than most commentators and myself included thought he was going to have. you could easily see the court and they were sympathetic to have much more than it looked like the beginning of this morning. >> martha: at some point the justices looked to the past. cavanaugh brought up some past presidents including obama and the drone strikes. but other justices said sandra: it's about now and about the future of the presidency. so do you believe that the former president donald trump as he has his day here at the new -- new york supreme court will look at what came out of the court today in washington and think this was a good day for him? >> this is the best he could have had and actually i would tell him don't come to the supreme court, he had 1 already

against colorado. you wasn't there either. i thank the best thing for him to do is to stay away from the supreme court and not make it about him. unless it's about him tomorrow justices think about the office of the presidency and the better he is going to do. 1 of the things that came apparent and oral arguments and all the examples you just mentioned you listen to sandra this is the ground trump wants to fight on. he wanted to be fought on policy considerations and how it will affect the presidency. it's harder to find immunity from history and the text. he should be really happy today. >> sandra: let's bring it back to the new york courtroom where former president donald trump still remains at this hour. he is excited to emerge and speak with cameras we will likely get a better sense of how the day went but as far as we know the cross-examination of the first witness david pecker is still ongoing at this hour. what are your thoughts and takeaways from what's come out of the courtroom so far?

>> 1 thing i would want to add to the xers -- excellent discussion you had already is what the da is having trouble showing is what crime did donald trump actually commit, what law was really broken. the da is focusing on facts and trying to make them sorted and keep the jury's attention on it but the larger question is if this is something that david pecker has been doing for a while if there is no in-person meeting between them for years then how could it have been some kind of coordinated campaign spending that was hidden to deceive the public an estate where hillary clinton 1 overwhelmingly? so what they are allowing is the argument that what trump did was violate federal campaign law not really state law. the problem there is the da for manhattan is not to -- allowed to enforce federal law. it's up to the justice

department. they looked at it and decided to leave it alone. 2000 da's in the country are not supposed to be ringing around enforcing election law on behalf of the whole nation. that's the job at the justice department. >> sandra: as we've been doing we've lent our viewers know exactly what we getting from inside the courtroom john. the latest update i got from this hush money trial at the new york supreme court from the packer testimony as the cross-examination continues, nursing event or activity at the courthouse so we will watch to sea if former president donald trump emerges. but packer met with federal prosecutors in 2018 and the da's office in 2019 as a sort of freak back to you what's coming out of their. the trump attorney asked packer to give an idea of the questions he was facing today. packer said he was not surprised by the line of questioning they go back to the august 2015 meeting john and his

relationship with cohen. becker confirms he worked with cohen and he was his personal attorney not part of the campaign. in july 2018 packer was first asked about the august 2015 meeting and he was questioned by the fbi and warned not to lie. okay. so now the trump attorney is asking if packer told authorities whether or not it was present. this is what were getting out of the courtroom. what's your response to that? >> what you can see i think is again showing this is just everyday business. there's nothing unusual here. this is what celebrities have to deal with, and da's, payments. fine unfortunately quite sorted but it's not illegal to have the nda. it's not illegal to pay people not to tell the stories to the public. the more this is just the kind of thing trump has to deal with on a daily basis because he is a

celebrity the less it has to do the campaign will appear the justice department doesn't bring cases like this because juries tend to equip. that's why da's who work with someone else here for manhattan really shouldn't be bringing cases like this. it's outside their jurisdiction and fact is probably constitutional for him to chided her fear with federal investigations and decisions not bring charges. >> okay. it looks like they are probably pretty close to the end of this day and court. we'll keep watching for the present count drone thank you for joining us as we continue to report breaking news from their. as we do look live at the new york supreme court and lower manhattan we should be hearing from the former present any moment now. we will take a quick break, we'll be right back. or want to explore the space economy?

choose from over 40 themes, each with up to 25 stocks identified by our unique algorithm. buy it as-is or customize to align with your goals. all at your fingertips. schwab investing themes. 40 customizable themes. up to 25 stocks in just a few clicks. ♪ how do i get my raised beds looking so good? i do have a secret, a very special secret. it's organic soil from miracle-gro. you're great too, ryan. not as great as the soil, though. okay... you said it. [ryan laughs] ( ♪ ♪ ) start your day with nature made. the #1 pharmacist recommended vitamin and supplement brand. ah, these bills are crazy. she has no idea she's sitting on a goldmine. well she doesn't know that if she owns a life insurance policy of $100,000 or more she can sell all or

part of it to coventry for cash. even a term policy. even a term policy? even a term policy! find out if you're sitting on a goldmine. call coventry direct today at the number on your screen, or visit coventrydirect.com. the day you get your clearchoice dental implants makes every day... a "let's dig in" day... mm. ...a "chow down" day... a "take a big bite" day...

a "perfectly delicious" day... - mm. [ chuckles ] - ...a "love my new teeth" day. because your clearchoice day is the day everything is back on the menu. a clearchoice day changes every day. schedule a free consultation. ♪ imagine a future where plastic is not wasted... but instead remade over and over... into the things that keep our food fresher, our families safer, and our planet cleaner. to help us get there, america's plastic makers are investing billions of dollars to create innovative products and new recycling technologies for sustainable change. because when you push for smarter solutions, big things can happen. you are looking live at new york state supreme court waiting on remarks from former president

donald trump as the court wraps for the day. when he speaks we will bring it to you live. we are back in 60 seconds switch to shopify so you can build it better, scale it faster and sell more. much more. take your business to the next stage when you switch to shopify.

alright, what we know right now is court has not overtly adjourned yet or the day but any moment now that could be the case here in new york in the new york versus trump trial of the former president and his team has said on old trump is expected to make his way out of that courtroom up to the microphone and speak. we will have that for you when it happens live. as we watch at the former federal prosecutor and criminal defence attorney john are here to discuss. francine to you first what we have been told is the jurors have departed? court has officially wrapped okay. we could be seeing him at any moment. give us your thoughts than on what we have heard come out of the courtroom so far today?

>> you know, sandra i was an assistant da before federal prosecutor and he always the adults with you're strongest witness. the 1 who can tell the story of the case, the 1 who's going to ensure the jury believes and go before anyone else gets a chance to get up and talk. what i learned today was if the first witness is there a strongest pack greg's cases in a world of trouble. >> sandra: shaw weak. >> i agree. this is like trying a murder case without a dead guy. there is no crime so far that we have heard and the whole reason we are in this court sandra is because there is supposed to be some underlying crime that caused former president donald trump to falsified business records. we had no idea what the crime was. now we do have an idea and guess what? this crime is not a crime either because what bragg is trying to say the underlying crime is that he conspired to promote or prevent somebody from taking office. while former president donald trump wasn't running for mayor of new york this is a federal election.

number 2 the crime he is pointed his finger on his misdemeanour. that is long gone in terms of the statute of limitations. so what are we doing her? >> sandra: what we're doing is watching right there for the former president to come out as it was a big day for him, a big legal day obviously with the dealings happening at the supreme court in washington and here at the new york state supreme court on the hush money trial. so francine to you, we now see the former president walking out of the courtroom. 's team has said he plans to talk. as he has often done he will walk toward the microphone and deliver his take on the day. let's listen in to the former president. >> thank you very much. thank you very much everybody. today was a breathtaking with what went on it was breathtaking. and amazing testimony. this is a child i should have never happen, this is a case

that should have never been filed. it was really an incredible day. opening your eyes and we can't let this continue to happen to our country. but another matter you know the economy is reported to be doing vary badly, the stock market is way down. some powerful numbers came out including some high numbers on inflation and in particular gasoline. 7 and a half dollars in california usually leads the way it's going to happen hereto. very importantly as you look at the various colleges in the country and beyond colleges because it's happening in other areas to, you sea what's happening on the front having to do with palestine and israel at protests, hate and anger. biden is sending an absolutely horrible message. horrible horrible message he has no idea how to message. he cannot speak output to

sentences together he doesn't know what to do. this is not our president this is somebody that shouldn't be doing what he is doing because he can't do it. he can't do it well. you're having protests all over he was talking about charlottesville. it was nothing compared and the hate was the kind of hate you have here. this is tremendous hate. we can talk about it he doesn't understand that he doesn't understand what's going on with our country. he doesn't understand that all over the world we are being laughed at as a country because of him and his administration. and today i was forced to be here, i'm glad i was because it was interesting in a certain way. but the u.s. supreme court had a monumental hearing on immunity and immunity having to do with presidential imminent he. i think it was made clear, i hope it was made clear that a president has to have immunity, you don't have a president or

most you could say would be a ceremonial president, that's not what the founders had in mind. they're not talking about ceremonial we want presidents who can get things done and bring people together. it was quite amazing, quite amazing. the justices were on their game so let's see how it all turns out. but again i say presidential imminent he, very powerful. presidential immunity is imperative are reportedly won't have a country anymore. thank you very much. thank you. >> sandra: we're waiting there to sea if he took in a other questions as he walked up at the former president wrapped his remarks and will now depart the supreme court here in new york city where he went through another day on this hush money trial. our legal experts are still with us francine and johnna -- shauna. francine the former president emerged by calling what he saw

in the courtroom today breathtaking. so it was an amazing testimony and an incredible day. we cannot let this continue. he went in to weigh in on the moment of the day which was the economy, the stock market. took on president biden and talked about the protests. he wrapped by talking about what happened with the big day on immunity at the supreme court. but first, to what he said about what happened in the courtroom today francine. >> you know, he is right sandra it was an interesting day. but this case is a flat out abomination from start to finish. it's becoming more and more clear as the days passed that bragg does not have any evidence at all that former president donald trump actually committed a crime for which he can be prosecuted in the state of new york. it's absolutely extraordinary to me and extra nearly interest that you've got a judge who is allowing this case to go on when he is supposed to be refereeing,

calling balls and strikes. this case should have been dismissed shortly after indictment and we are now seeing that bragg does not have a case bringing against the first president in american history. >> sandra: we have a live look outside the courthouse the former president departing. to francine's point saying the case should never have been filed as we get the readout from the courtroom as the trial continues is to becoming more and more apparent to the american republic -- public that that is the case? >> it's been apparent to the american public for a while thank the question is is it becoming more apparent to the 12 people sitting in the jury box because it's amazing to me, i'm always -- almost wondering now if bragg knew darn -- darn while he would not have any criminal evidence to support this

indictment and he is just putting up this dog and pony show because whoever is pulling the strings told him to put on a dog and pony show. it's unbelievable we are wasting taxpayer resources cacti and and doll will trumps time off the campaign trail to sit here and listen to evidence that's not criminal in a criminal trial. it is appalling. i agree 100% it's appalling. >> sandra: okay so i'm reading through what happened in the final minutes before the court adjourned for the day and he emerged to speak to the camera's there. before departing the readout says the judge said he signed the prosecutions order to show cause on the latest gag order violations. the defence now has until monday 5:00 pm to respond. there we'll be a hearing wednesday 2:15 pm. at your thoughts on that. >> what that means is the judge

is inclined to say don't trump has been in violation of the gag order. it should be no surprise to anyone because the reason the judge is on this case because he should have according to new york law were accused himself. the reasonably feasting on the case is because he wants to put the former president trump in jail. he is just been waiting for an excuse to do it. i think that's why he is imposed these unconstitutional gag orders in the first place. because he had to know someone with president trumps expensive you -- view was going to violate the gag order 1 way or another. at thank it's going to fulfil his own goal of trying to put the president in jail and i don't doubt he will find any violating gag order. >> sandra: this was moments ago, but from -- president moments ago. we still have a camera and are watching for his departure there from the courtroom. i guess there is a debate at the end where the judge asked the

prosecution to elaborate on their objection and the prosecution said it was a total improper line of questioning and misled the jury. it left the jury with the impression he admitted something and it would be corrected tomorrow morning for the jury. what is your reaction to that jonna spilbor? >> to the happened in front of the jury? because of it did -- >> sandra: no. this happened after the judge dismissed the jurors and the witness. great question. >> okay so now the judge has a discussion outside and tells the defence attorney he made an improper objection and they will clear it up tomorrow, that's not typically how it goes. how it goes is you make an objection, you get a ruling then you move on. i don't know why the judges -- i do knew why he is favouring the prosecution because that's what the judge has done since day 1. all this will do is affect the record. it's outside the scope of the jury, it will affect the record but it will be diminished in the

grand scheme of thanks. >> francine the former president when he spoke a few moments ago, his words as he began his remarks to the camera, it was a trial that never should have happen. a case that never should have been filed. he called what he saw and heard in the courtroom really incredible. an incredible day. he told americans to open their eyes to what is happening. we will sea where this goes next. what can you tell us about what we will be watching next with the trial? >> what's interesting is i agree with jonna it looks like a dog and pony show. what's are they significant here sandra is the prosecution has made it clear it will use scare words like conspiracy and catch and kill and scheme in an effort literally to fool the jury into believing they are presenting evidence of a criminal violation when they actually aren't.

i certainly hope the defence sees through that, i expect they will and expect their cross-examination of every witness the case will focus on that. focusing on the fact that you've had completely legal actions by the president and not a single ounce of truth of anything illegal yet. >> sandra: really interesting to hear what he said he heard from the supreme court in washington today where he said he had whipped that he could've been. -- he wished he could have been. he said the president has to have immunity. he said he heard it was an amazing day at the supreme court in washington and he heard the justices were on their game. francine and jonna if you could stand by, back to the scene outside the courthouse in new york. the former president just departed after his trial today. nate can you wrap things up? >> reporter: sandra the notable moment at the vary end of courts today after the jury was dismissed, the prosecution

having an issue with how former president donald trump's lawyers asked david pecker about what he told the fbi specifically his presence at the 2015 meeting at trump tower. the prosecutors believe it made it seem like he purposely admitted something. that's something the judge said they will correct before the jury tomorrow. but we saw the defence lawyers sort of talk about the relationship between the da's office and david pecker. they asked the last time he had spoken with the da's office and if he was prepared for the questions they asked him today and he said he wasn't surprised by any of those questions. notably toward the end of his testimony he said in his dealings with former president donald trump's former lawyer michael cohen he was asked -- asked -- acting as his personal attorney rather than part of his campaign. and trumps lawyer also was

questioning packer about his memory. our court reporter wrote it seemed he was a bit flustered and couldn't remember specific dates saying "i don't have my calendar in front of me". again of course sandra this all happened after his direct examination ended where he actually spoke quite glowingly about former president donald trump calling him his mentor. he was asked if he had any bad feelings for him and he said it's the opposite khaki help them a lot in his career and even though they hadn't spoken since the winter 2019 khaki considers him a friend. we heard from former president donald trump speaking after court today and he called the breathtaking in a negative way. he said the case should never have been filed. again sandra we're also still waiting on the ruling on whether or not he violated the gag order and if he will be held in

contempt. remember it was just monday that he spoke about cohen and that was 1 of the examples today that the da's office put forward saying he violated the gag order again. 1 of 4 or examples they included this morning. back to you. >> sandra: his memory and her ability to recall days and dates became so questioned that the attorney said they prepare you for these questions? they're pretty standard. nate foy outside the courthouse in new york city thank you nate. more reaction to what the former president just said outside the court and what today's key witness said inside the court we'll be returned on medicare? have diabetes? when enjoying life's special moments are you left guessing which foods are right for you? with the freestyle libre 3 system you'll know your glucose and where it's headed no fingersticks needed. freestyle libre 3 manage your diabetes with more confidence and lower your a1c.

so you can focus on those special moments. covered by medicare for more people managing diabetes with insulin. talk to your provider or visit freestylelibre.us/medicare choosing a treatment for your chronic migraine - 15 or more headache days a month, each lasting 4 hours or more - can be overwhelming. so, ask your doctor about botox®. botox® prevents headaches in adults with chronic migraine before they even start. it's the #1 prescribed branded chronic migraine treatment. so far, more than 5 million botox® treatments have been given to over eight hundred and fifty thousand

chronic migraine patients. effects of botox® may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness can be signs of a life-threatening condition. side effects may include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue, and headache. don't receive botox® if there's a skin infection. tell your doctor your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions and medications, including botulinum toxins, as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. in a survey, 92% of current users said they wish they'd talked to their doctor and started botox® sooner. so, ask your doctor if botox® is right for you. learn how abbvie could help you save on botox®.

moments ago we heard from former president donald trump back he stepped out side the supreme court following day 7 of the states trial against him. jonathan and any mccarthy were listening at her back with us now. jonathan to you first, the former president emerge calling what he saw in the courtroom today breathtaking. he said it was amazing testimony at an incredible day. but we cannot let this continue. what were your thoughts on what you heard from the former president as he emerged?

>> i think this was a good day for the former president. good in the sense its never good to be in court as a criminal defendant but at least better when the case is falling apart. 's case never really took off. they started off with pecker and usually you start with you're strongest witness but the witness said he did the same thing for other celebrities like arnold swarts and aker. was he running for president because he is barred from being president. and cross-examination became very clear that this was something he did for trump who he called and mentor. it also became clear that this was really between him and michael cohen. when he asked trump about it and the reimbursement he said i don't know anything about that. none of that makes a good case if anything let alone a criminal

case. >> andy this was the former president also on his remarks a few moments ago. he said this about the case, listen... >> today was breathtaking in this room you saw what went on it was breathtaking. amazing testimony. this is a trial that should have never happened and a case that should have never been filed and it was really an incredible day. open your eyes, we can't let this continue to happen to our country. >> sandra: open your eyes he said. andy, the case should never have been filed all ask you a question i asked the ladies of moment ago is becoming more and more apparent to the american public that that is indeed the case? >> it may be sandra but, you know, wanting i would caution, i agree with everything jonathan

said and the other attorneys criticizing the weakness of the case but we are trained lawyers, you know, we know this area of the law and we know why there is no conspiracy here because we are experienced in that. we know why there is no campaign expenditure because we understand that part of the lot. >> sandra: and by the way andy does real quick for our viewers the former president is walking out you can see the motorcade, he has departed." ahead andy. >> all i want to say is as the country hearing that created probably our pack they are watching this on television so it's being filtered through commentary. what i would be concerned about is that there is what the public's hearing, there is what our audience is hearing and than there is the jury trial. in the jury they are getting the prosecutors point of view and prosecutors case and taking

their cues from the judge who is being quite friendly to the prosecution throughout. my concern would be that alvin bragg has teed this case up for the jury as if the charge here is theft of the 2016 election by the suppression of politically damaging information. i know that's not a crime and jonathan does, i'm not sure the jury is going to know it's not a crime by the time they hear that presentation as this sort of captive audience in the courtroom and get whatever prosecution from the instructions the judge is going to give the jury. >> sandra: okay and there goes the president's motorcade leaving the new york state supreme court. remarkable to jonathan that while all this is going on he has said publicly he would rather have been sitting in the supreme court where the immunity case was ongoing.

he gave his thoughts on what he heard coming out at the court earlier listen. >> the u.s. supreme court had a monumental hearing on immunity. the immunity having to do with presidential him in it he. i think it was made clear, i hope it was made clear that a president has to have immunity. you don't have a president, at most he could say a ceremonial president, that's not what the founders had in mind. we want presidents that can get things done and bring people together. so i her the meeting was quite amazing. and the justices were on their game. so let's see how it all turns up but again i say presidential inanity very powerful. presidential immunity is imperative or you practically won't have a country anymore. >> sandra: looks like he was told it was a good day at the

supreme court, jonathan. >> i think it was a fairly good day quite friendly. first of all it does appear you've got 4 may be 5 justices client to send the case back to perfect this record. that alone would be a tactical benefit to the former president. it would make any trial before the election much less likely. if at all possible. there is also a lot of concern among these justices. the media has been pounding away at how sweeping the argument of the president is. many of those justices were as concerned with the sweeping aspect of the lower court decision of having no immunity at all for the present in these cases. >> sandra: alright jonathan and andy appreciate you standing buy and covering the breaking news for us. thank you. excellent analysis of their, for more legal analysis the former deputy assistant general and former justice john you the quick thought.

>> i think we are asking what is the crime that is thought to be have been here. the more we see the less there is an combine that with what we heard earlier how does that interact with the other case. i'm shocked actually how good a day trump had on both legal fronts. usually you don't want a 2 front war. asked germany in 1945. but it looks like trump is successfully actually turning to legal tables in his favour. i wouldn't have expected this. i thank the judiciary is being fair to him and most people would've expected. i thank the last trump makes it about him the better he's going to do. >> sandra: katie? >> i think these supreme court arguments were vary favourable for trump today. the 6 conservative justices seemed poised to admit there is at least some level of immunity at the present is entitled to, the question is where they draw the line. that is going to be important not only for the trumpet the future of the american

presidency. they are keenly aware this is something that we'll potentially and in an endless cycle of political prosecution that they don't draw a strict mind as to where that ends. >> sandra: you know, john as i'm getting updates here as we saw the former president depart and leave the courthouse, our producer on the ground is noting as he left the courthouse he waved at the cameras. you are reminded how this day began and he had a surprise appearance early in new york city at 6:30 am. he left trump tower and said hello to a bunch of construction workers because he has made the case that it's not there he says that he is having to sit in a courtroom while the current president joe biden is on the campaign trail and an election year. but certainly he made use of the fact he is in new york city. but that is a frustration. we heard many times as he

stepped up to the microphone he is sitting in there and can't be out there. >> 1 thing we've been emphasizing is what effect this has on future presidents. perhaps we've been ignoring what might be equally important, what effect this has on our campaigns and elections. it's all been done not just to a former president but the incoming president joe biden's main rival for the presidency and we could be really distorting the criminal justice system and electoral system if we allow the criminal laws to be used to punish and to stop someone from running for the presidency against an income in. that's where south america has gone and countries in europe have gone and it's really harming their political systems. this is what were starting to see today. >> sandra: katie could you tie that and to a we heard from the supreme court, the concern we heard from the justices like brett cavanaugh about the impact of this immunity case that it will have on future presidents

and future presidencies and the country. there is a lot more at stake >> oh, absolutely, and the president has to make so many discretionary calls and their duties that you could easily have an opposing political party that comes into power, second-guessing literally every decision that they are making and trying to fit it under a criminal statute of some sort and then it would have to go through the court system to have an analysis of whether or not it fell into a certain category of prosecutable conduct. that does not seem sustainable whatsoever, so i'm really hoping the court is very clear in the rule that they create not only for donald trump but for all future american presidents. >> sandra: john, to finish up on the new york trial, i guess things will resume tomorrow morning. we will wait for the specifics on that. but where does this go next? i mean, we're just talking about the first witness here and the cross-examination that ended the day. what do you expect from the trial tomorrow? >> the d.a. alvin bragg does not want to talk about all the serious legal problems in this case, so he is going to try to

make it all about sordid deals, look how trump conspired with other people to cover up these stories are about girlfriends payments and payoffs. he wants to keep the jury fixated on the facts because he doesn't have the law on his side. now what trump's attorneys should be trying is not just poke holes into the facts, but try to stress that the prosecution has no real law behind it. >> sandra: john yoo and katie cherkasky, appreciate you joining us throughout the hour. all right, that does it for us and a 7 of the new york versus trump trial. we will keep watching it and covering it. thanks for joining us today. breathing catch me, me and john roberts, 1:00 p.m. eastern "america reports," for now keep it right here for "the five." ♪ ♪