for you, a jury in new york finding donald trump, the republican presidential front runner, by far liable for sexually abusing and defaming writer, e. jean carroll. the jury also awarding the former magazine columnist nearly $5 million in damages to be paid by mr. trump. carol walked out of the manhattan courthouse just moments ago with her lawyer who said that they re quote, very happy with the jury s decision. carol s lawsuit stemmed from an encounter between her and trump in a new york department store dressing room in 1996. she claims donald trump sexually assaulted her. donald trump reacted on his social media platform, writing in all caps, quote, i have absolutely no idea who this woman is, this verdict is a disgrace, continuation of the greatest witch hunt of all-time, unquote. this all comes as trump is facing another very serious case in new york city, just last month the former president pleaded not guilty to 34 felony charges related to hush money payments to ad
courtroom. essentially as you have to show it s more probative and prejudice, meaning is it going to help eliminate an issue for the jury in a way that s not going to undually prejudice the the person who is accused. in this case because it was about this other prior bad act that related to a direct claim that was being made by somebody on a witness stand, the relevance likely outweighed the actual prejudice shl value. the judge knowing will be thinking of this has been out in the public. it s not as if the tape was covered and cobwebs buried under a rock and no one knew about it for years on end. it was part of a major presidential election. so the idea of admitting it for this particular case, the judge probably looked at it. although it s in the court of public opinion does not mean it comes into the court of law. but here you re weighing that probative value against the need for the testimony. once you decide the other person who witnessed it is able to
doj, go to your pals in the senate, have them investigate it. you and i both agree that was wrong. listen, then there was a way to go about it and that s not what this president did. i m out of time. there s a way to go after this, too, with the president but dragging at american people through an impeachment process that they know will go nowhere in the senate is absolutely a waste of time and does nothing but divide the country. i appreciate your argument. all i ll end it with is if they didn t do it, what press den shl value is it that this president can t do it again. you re always welcome here. be well until then. appreciate it. one thing s for sure, as you see with congressman mullin, the president is getting a lot of help. every gop member of the house is all about his fate. they re not about oversight right now, they re about overseeing his fate. that s their choice. he even has an attorney general doing whatever he can to keep his boss out of hot water. here hype h
it s decided by the supreme court. you have talked about the issues in the past to other people, i m sure. the supreme court has held repeatedly, senator, and i don t think it would be appropriate for me to give a personal not going to answer the question. laura, jeffrey toobin as you know, chief legal analyst said repeatedly he thinks whoever president trump picks and will ultimately vote to overturn roe versus wade. doesn t sound like it based on that testimony. the lower court aspect of it, jake, where all of the rubber will meet the road. think about it. the reason that somebody s in an appellate court to the lower court is abide by the superior, the supreme court. and so, if you think about why he would follow the precedent shl value of roe v. wade, it is not a vested interest but because of where he stands on the court totem pole. if he s a supreme court justice, he is not beholden to the level
vaseline kadyrbayev believed to be, quote, for making bombs, a laptop and backpack. they, quote, did not want tsarnaev to get into trouble. kadyrbayev s lawyer says his client absolutely denies the charges. he did not know that those items were involved in a bombing or of any interest in a bombing or any evidence shl value. that s all we have to say on that, but we are the ones, mr. dias and kadyrbayev cooperated with all law enforcement when they came to him without the benefit of counsel to assist in the investigation of this horrible tragedy. joining me tonight from boston, david phil pov, who spent 15 years in russia covering the chechen wars. david, i have to say, this is a very strange turn in this case. this morning when i saw word there had been three suspects, i think my thought and everyone s thought was, oh, my, there was more to this plot, there was a cell, there were more people. it now appears from the