signals it may restore donald trump s gag order in the federal election subversion case but loosen some restrictions. we ll tell you why the former president took the green light for some public attacks on special counsel jack smith. welcome to our viewers in the united states and around the world. wolf blitzer is off today. i m pamela brown. you re in the situation room. we begin this hour in israel. the families of hostages held by hamas just made an urgent appeal to the netanyahu government, pushing for action to bring their relatives homes. cnn s nic robertson is following all the new developments from his position overlooking gaza. nic, what is the latest? reporter: there does some to be some optimism around the hostages. the reality is in every sort of hostage family that i ve talked to here reminds me when i speak about the possibility of getting their loved ones home, they say you have to recognize and understand that hamas is not a state actor. it is not a ration
the courthouse. lisa rubin, catherine christian and caroline polisi. thank you all for being with us. in the meantime, ken, what can we expect from this hearing and remind us of the parameters of the current gag order. reporter: it prohibits former president trump from criticizing the prosecutor, special counsel jack smith and members of his team, court personnel and witnesses or potential witnesses in the case. it does not prohibit him from criticizing the justice department or the biden administration or saying that this entire prosecution is corrupt. but what the judge concludes is when former president trump makes specific attacks on individuals on social media, it s often the case that those individuals are then harassed and targeted by trump followers. that happened in the case of the judge herself, who was the target of a death threat after former president trump criticized her. so former president trump s lawyers are saying this is a violation of his first amendment
digging into local georgia laws, ordinarily you d expect what s known as the arraignment, the first appearance, the start if you like of the criminal trial process, would normally happen in a few days ordinarily. the prosecutor in this case as she is giving the defendants 19 defendants until midday local time on friday to voluntarily surrender but in donald trump s case certainly hears a secret service protective. that means the secret service and local law enforcement have to discuss that timing. more will be clear over the next 12 24 hours. in terms of the timing of the trial prosecution that they will ask whether it s possible to bring this to trial within the next six months but what would be likely to happen as with the other cases is that mr trump los lotharios would say hang on, we have two years of investigations, the grand jury have interviewed 75 witnesses, the evidence in the case is enormous and we need time to
sometimes they will say it s it s fairly neutral. you know, it s very difficult. it s possible. all right, it s possible. from a defence point of view, possible is is perhaps enough. and it s a very fundamental part of our system that if the prosecution bring a case, they really have to prove it and they have to prove it so a jury is sure, because that s the safeguard. you hope that criminal trial process will enable those genuine cases to be pulled out from those lesser genuine. but is there a from those lesser genuine. mt is there a guarantee that that will always happen? i am afraid that isn t. i am afraid there isn t. it seems like the sexsomnia defence could definitely be open to manipulation. but the barrister told me that the courtroom is where
any other expert in this area, that will say, um, you know, this is a clear cut case of sexsomnia. sometimes they will say it s it s fairly neutral. you know, it s very difficult. it s possible. all right, it s possible. from a defence point of view, possible is is perhaps enough. one of the things that i will sometimes say to a jury, and it s a very fundamental part of our system that if the prosecution bring a case, they really have to prove it and they have to prove it so a jury is sure, because that s the safeguard. you hope that that process, that criminal trial process, will enable those genuine cases to be pulled out from those less genuine. but is there a guarantee that that will always happen? i m afraid there isn t. it seems like the sexsomnia defence could definitely be