A newscast reviewing and analyzing top stories of the day as they happen. Did you find him to be credible . No. I think he would have done anything that he could to preserve himself. Thats just obvious in the fact that he flipped on manafort. Shepard but that juror went on to convict Paul Manafort. Peter doocy will have more on that in just a moment and john roberts will have a detailed wrapup on a renewed throw down between the Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the president. First, lets get to Rick Leventhal with more on the reported immunity deal for the publisher of the National Inquirer and now former trump friend david pecker. Former friend. Sources are confirming this Wall Street Journal report that the u. S. Attorneys office offered immunity to david pecker so that he would talk about what he knew about Michael Cohens handling of those payments to those women, david pecker, longtime friend of the president and runs the National Inquirer. The journal reports the details include
Interviews with newsmakers and roundtable discussions cover the top news stories of the day. Interviews with newsmakers and roundtable discussions cover the top news stories of the day. Simply the fact that this strategy on the part of mueller and the other district of new york prosecutors may be working right now. One interesting question will be to what extent will there be information relating to state law charges against some of these people and that is legally significant because the president s pardon power does not extend to state law crimes. Harris all right, what you have seen with cohen and manafort and perhaps pecker and allen weisselberg, the cases, they have struck deals for immunity, you wouldnt imagine they would go anywhere legally. If the president wanted to pardon anyone, we are still within the zone with the previous men. State law doesnt tend to change that. As we look ahead in all of this, the president , though, does have something to consider as he is being asked
Wasnt a player of significance . President trump he was a lawyer for me for one of many. They always say the lawyer and they like to add the fixer. I dont know where that term came from. He has been a lawyer for me. Didnt do big deals, did small deals. Not somebody that was with me that much. They make it sound like i didnt live without him. You hear the president s description there cohen pleaded guilty to Campaign Finance violations which is an interesting thing to plead guilty to, considering there are a great many attorneys, including some ive spoken to here, Who Dont Think that rises to the level. See how that all plays out in sentencing and moving forward. Jon, back to you. Jon more to come on both of those cases. Kevin corke at the white house. Sandra another exclusive interview for fox news shan an bream sitting down with one of the jurors in the Paul Man Fort Trial and how close the jury
because they know they had 111 in favor of conviction even on the counts that ended up bei
What did the president know and when did he know it. And we all know where that phrase comes from. You know on days like this within this week of big news around Michael Cohen and other people like Paul Manafort, sometimes we will hear an Immediate Response from the white house. We have not yet heard anything as far as i know from you, john, but this is one of those situations where the president would say, what about the situation . I mean it is not i said situation twice in one sentence, i apologize. But now is it more apparent perhaps of why he would have passed this on to federal prosecutors . I was talking with Brian Kilmeade about this on the radio this morning and even though this was not about the mueller case and a mueller hand of the soft to the Southern District of new york because they felt it fell outside of the purview of the investigation into russia collusion, it would definitely seem to be a loop
now a Law Professor at California Berkeley joins me now. Its great to hav
Chris Cuomo asks the tough questions to newsmakers in Washington and around the world. Thats something that i think is very foreign. I guarantee it, chris, even though he koops, hes smart enough, Michael Cohen, not to say he was present at any meeting in which the president said i have an arrangement with the russians. Witnesses dont do that. Why not . If the question of collusion is on a scale one to ten, hell move it up to seven. Hell say, well, the president says he has a good arrangement with the russians but hell never say that the president said that he had a Collusive Arrangement with the russians. But thats t not the standard. What if he were present for a meeting where somebody gave the president information about something the that was going to happen that was a 23u7ks of the hacking and the president therefore knew about it at a time when he said he did not know about it . What if the president that would be punishable. Meetings that he said he doesnt know about and Michael