welcome to "hannity". tonight we begin with the obvious, joe biden, he's a train wreck both mentally and physically. his presidency, that's an unmitigated disaster both at home and abroad. and his campaign is a joke with a few cringe worthy events, actually wanted a at least. small crowds, no enthusiasm whatsoever, attending a biden rally is more of a punishment for democrats filled with anxiety. is joe going to be able to string two coherent sentences together and then successfully walk offstage, which is why nobody shows up. a kind like today in philly. and jill biden said on the view either joe is elected or evil will win. we got the tape. democrats, they are in a state of panic, they are desperate so in lieu of any traditional campaign or running on the novel idea of an answering the question are you better off than you were four years ago, well, the democratic party, they are now relying on another political tactic. you can call it the weaponization of our justice department or simply just call it law fair. in new york city alvin bragg and judge merchan's bogus case against trump has all the elements of a left-wing law fair campaign, including a politically driven da, prosecutors who are active in the democratic party, a jury pool from one of the most anti-trump republican conservative districts in the entire country, and of course a partisan hack judge who heavily and obviously and clearly favors the prosecution. what we have seen from new york judge merchan is a disgrace to our constitution and our system of justice. he hasn't just tipped the scales against trump, time and time again he's acted as the prosecution's friend and ally and as i have been saying basically here's a scale of justice, he's throwing cinderblocks on the scales of justice. there's no doubt that merchan wants trump convicted and he's doing everything possible to make that happen. tonight more damning evidence of merchan's judicial misconduct, to put it politely. history instructions were not only unconstitutional but rather insane. here's former u.s. attorney andy mccarthy explaining the latest gift to the prosecution. take a look. >> what is supposed to happen in a criminal trial is a prosecutor has to prove every element of an offensive beyond a reasonable doubt. what this judge is telling this jury in this kind of make it up as you go along new york state prosecution of federal law is that when they get to the end of the rainbow and we get to the elements of the a fence, the jury doesn't have to be in agreement on what it is exactly that trump did or what he was trying to commit or conceal when he allegedly falsified his business records. so they are going to give the jury a menu of choices and tell the jury that some of them may believe that this was a criminal objective, some of them a believe something else was, but that they don't have to be unanimous on that. i think that that is pretty outrageous. >> sean: a novel criminal charge and a novel approach to jury instruction. so according to judge merchan, the jury, they don't need to reach unanimous decision on that phantom election allocation, the prosecution was never even able to really describe. an unspecified federal election crime that was never charged or tried anywhere ever in america. apparently judge merchan believes he's above the law and was perfectly willing to trample on our constitution out will. we know from the 2020 supreme court ruling, judge merchan, you may want to pay close attention, somebody will tell you about this show, it's called ramos versus louisiana, i'm sure you've heard of it, you are ignoring it but you've heard of it. let me quote it for you." there can be no question either that the six amendments unanimity requirement applies to state and federal criminal trials equally and the law does not stop there." here is that the brain court ruling from another case saying unanimity in jury verdicts is required where the sixth and seventh amendment supply. that would be our constitution, judge. in criminal cases this requirement of unanimity extends to all issues character or degree of the crime, guilt and punishment, which are left to the jury. again "in criminal cases, this requirement of unanimity extends to all issues." i will repeat, all issues. there is no carveout or biden donating judges like judge merchan who hate donald trump. here's another violation of trump's civil liberties carried out by judge merchan and the prosecution. according to cornell law, the sixth amendment of our constitution grants all americans "the right to know who your accusers are, the nature of the charges and evidence against you." so what is the election crime trump is being accused of and who is making the allegation? the prosecution, they never answer to these questions. now the judge is allowing the jury to choose pretty much their own adventure. pick whatever crime works for you as long as there are 12 of you, it doesn't matter the reason, just agree that you hate the guy and want him to be guilty. it does not even need to be unanimous. this is totally unconstitutional , beyond unethical. judge merchan is clearly trying to help the prosecution get this across the finish line, despite no evidence of any crime. this after constantly favoring the constitution, the prosecution,'s abstaining -- sustaining allegations and sustaining that somehow cohen violations are attached to this trial. he felt like he was treated badly and not really a big deal. when it came to the defense, judge merchan lashed out at trump's attorneys, paraded a trump witness, blocked testimony from an expert witness on election law, bradley smith, former fec chair, overruled restrictions, a gag order only on donald trump and then threatened to throw him in jail if he violated it. this judge is out of control and other cards have stacked against donald trump. take a look. >> mother teresa cannot beat these charges. these charges are rigged, the whole thing is rigged, to have a trial like this where the judge is so conflicted he can't breathe, he's going to do his job. it's not for me, that i can tell you. it's a disgrace and i mean that. mother teresa could not be these charges but we will see, we will see how we do. it's a very disgraceful situation. >> sean: based on the four questions, the request from jury deliberations today, it appears the jury, you know, is closely studying the testimony and smear campaign presented by the prosecution. some believe that is a conviction that might be for coming. make no mistake a conviction won't be a surprise there is a matter of fact no outcome here will surprise me. this is a jury selected from new york city and where biden won just 90% shy of the vote. this is a jury tainted by the judge who has been anything but fair. democrats have weaponized your system of justice, they have shred your constitution in the process and just imagine for a second if a deep red state like let's say wyoming, idaho, i don't know, alabama cooked up a felony charge against barack obama, they used a novel legal theory and then tried the case before a judge who donated to donald trump, and on top of that throw cinderblocks on the scales of justice and pretty much let the prosecution say anything they want, even accuse the defendant of a crime he's not accused of or constantly say he broke the law when in fact that should not have been admissible. you think that would sit well with the democratic party and the mob in the media? i don't think so. but tonight some good news, of trump's convicted, this case will go to appeal and trump will in the end win. if he is elected, he will have an important opportunity to restore america's system of justice and you know what, i don't care who the president is, if it's a republican president, i would never want to this type of law fair, this weaponization of our justice system to be used against anybody i disagree with politically. anyway, it with reaction from the trump organization, eric trump, he's been in the courtroom for the better part of this trial. you know, i will let you take it from there but, you know, everything this judge does in this particular case to me, you know, at this point i expect it. it's not even a shock anymore. >> you know, sometimes i'm angry, sometimes i'm numb to it. i watch my father go in there every day and fight for his life, literally against bogus charges. upset on the show and on others, no one believes that $130,000 from eight years ago for a perfectly legal nda, booked a legal expense to a personal long time lawyer booked is a legal expense is a crime were a former president and the front runner for republican party is charged with 34 felony counts. no one believes it. the entire city of new york is shut down. you have half of the nypd guarding the lower half of manhattan around this trial. they are shutting down the fdr drive every day. no one believes it. then you have this judge, in her watch the conduct and you have to watch it from the front row, from front and center, so many of the fox reporters have. when you are in there and he's literally sustaining every single one of their objections, he will not give us a single thing, he's disqualifying our witnesses, he's not adding the head of the nbc testify that there is no crime here, he's not letting castillo speak, not letting him get a single word out, he's saying my father testifies, they can go back to every single thing he's ever said or ever done, even if it's not related to this case. the thing is a stacked, you've never seen anything like it. it wasn't until this morning did they actually outline six months later was the actual crime reportedly was. there is no crime here but they did not even give us the decency of telling my father what it was until they dragged him through the mud every single day, wasted his time, put him in the ice box for weeks and weeks and weeks and weeks. and that is what this is, this is corruption, this is a judge that donated to stop republicans, this is a judge that reportedly, you have reported, has a daughter who has raised millions and millions of dollars based on fundraising for democratic causes. this is a judge who somehow gets every single anti-trump case. is that really -- that is really interesting. the first trump case and in this case. >> sean: there was no jury pool in this case, he was selected, eric. >> of course. that's no different than fulton county. in georgia, why did they go to fulton county? it's about as far left as you can get. why did they go to downtown new york, it's about as far left. why did they pick this judge? this isn't random. it would defy every law of every statistical model in history to get this judge on every single trump case. especially a judge that wasn't even voted in, this was an appointee judge. is not even on the list of 24 judges but yet he just somehow miraculously ends up with every trump case and his daughter is reportedly making millions and millions of dollars? and reportedly has a screenshot on her, you know, social profiles of my father behind bars? and will recuse himself after voting to stop republicans? and you have the entire das office front row and they are laughing about this, they are laughing about $130,000 were every single day you have another person stabbed in the chest on the streets of new york and the city is going to hell and it stinks and there's homelessness all over the place and this is their focus? the reason it's their focus is donald trump is winning. he's waiting in the polls, biden is incompetent can people realize that democrats finally realize that the guy will not make it to the finish line, they are panicking. and what do they do, they weaponize the legal system against donald trump has they've done every day since he's come down that escalator and honestly it's frustrating as a son to watch him go through this hell and this torture and the guy is incredible and honestly kudos to him, no one else could deal with this. no one. >> sean: i don't know many people that could, for sure. and it's certainly true that you and your family have been through a lot. your father, you know, seams to have the capacity to deal with it unlike anybody else i know. we will watch, we will see what happens tomorrow and, you know, you have to hope that maybe there are people on this jury that see through this. that would be my best hope. i'm not expecting an acquittal, hopefully a hung jury but, you know, when you put that many cinderblocks on the scales of justice, you know, at some point you risk tipping the balance completely which i think is what the aim has been from day one. eric trump, thank you sir. here with reaction, fox news contributor, george washington university law professor, jonathan turley is back. let's get your take on the request for instructions by the jury on these four separate items. the testimony about the phone conversation with trump, testimony about the decision regarding the assignment of the mcdougall's life rights,'s testimony about the trump tower meeting and michael cohen's testimony about the trump tower meeting. i know we should not read into these things, i've read into it a thousand different ways, i did everything i know i should not do, but i want to get your thoughts. >> well as you've noted we are all speculating here. but there's nothing else to do. i'm surprised that some other networks have said this is really great news, that they sent this out. i have to tell you as a criminal defense attorney, i would not view this as clearly good news for the prosecution. the only reason why a jury would send out a request to here the instructions again is if there's a disagreement about what the instructions are. that indicates that there may be a conflict with jurors in that room about what their standard is, how they are supposed to look at the evidence. there are various reasons why these particular parts of the testimony would be demanded by the jury. among them is a rather intriguing one, the judge told the jury that if cohen lied to any material fact, a jury can disregard all of his testimony. he noted that that means that you have to look for -- he's someone who's not obviously just a serial perjurer but he's an accomplice. so they happen to have requested the trump meeting which the government cited as cooperation for cohen so it may have been that's a started logically and say first of all can we consider anything that michael cohen has said? and that would lead them to cooperation which would lead to the trump tower meetings. it would also lead them to the instruction. that is what is going on? not necessarily. that is one possibility. the other possibilities include that they are looking at this evidence and trying to figure out what they can establish as fact, not just to insinuate or assume the facts. so i don't consider this such a clearly positive thing for the prosecution. as a defense attorney i would welcome this type of request. they were only in there for a few hours and they asked to here the instructions again and they asked to here court testimony. the problem that trump is having remains those instructions. they are very one-sided and they have converted this into something of a can't hunt. what judge merchan has said is that you could divide four, four, four. you could have three groups of jurors her view the facts materially differently. they could disagree as to what crime was behind this effort to falsify business records, and merchan will still treat that as a unanimous verdict. that is pretty chilly for people who believe strongly in the criminal justice system and the very high standard of proof that is required. >> sean: let me ask you about that. is the judge saying the underlying election charge does not have to be unanimous? that to me would be a reversible error and what's interesting, i did quote two supreme court cases which by the way a fairly recent case, a 2020 case, and the supreme court held that unanimity in a jury verdict required -- is required under the sixth and seventh amendments and the requirements extend to any and all issues. to find someone jury -- guilty to a must agree without dissent on every necessary element of the purported crime. that could not be any more clear. why would he set himself up with such a reversible error? >> yeah, he's claiming that look, they are still unanimous there was some crime behind all of this. i don't think that's adequate. we haven't seen the jury verdict form or what they will fill out. it's not clear. i've been in that court room, it's not clear once they vote whether we will actually know what was the crime that they found to elevate this misdemeanor back into life and convert it into a felony. we haven't seen those documents in this system. so do i think this is potential reversible error? sure. it's rather a long list now of what i think our reversible errors by this judge. i expected him to do more of an effort to cure it. but the judge also has to look at this transcript when they read it tomorrow. at the end of the hearing the judge was questioning the defense who wanted to include in the transcript something i thought was obviously material. the jury wants to here what was said about the trump tower meeting. one of the things that defense wants to point out is what was said that was not included in the meeting. merchan indicated he did not think that was something they needed to here. my jaw dropped. that seams clearly material. so we will see if he comes to a different conclusion in the morning. >> sean: jonathan turley, thank you as always. joining us now with more is texas senator ted cruz. alan kircher wits says you were one of his best and brightest students. your take on what we've been discussing? >> listen, i've got good news and bad news. the good news is the exchange were just having with jonathan turley is exactly right. we now know to a virtual certainty that no conviction will be upheld on appeal. that the judge today committed i think clear reversible error. these jury instructions were nonsense. here's the bad news. the bad news is, this has been a kangaroo court from the beginning. this is a wildly partisan prosecutor who hates donald trump, who came with a political objective of going after donald trump, and we now know from these jury instructions that this judges every bit the partisan that the prosecutor is and he knows this is reversible error, as you noted. ramos versus louisiana, clearly held in 2020 that every element of the crime must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, must be unanimous by the jury, and yet this judge says it does not matter, not in new york, the constitution does not apply in new york, which means if we get a conviction, it will be reversed on appeal. but the judge does not care. the prosecutor does not care, nobody cares because this is not about law, this is not about criminal justice, this is about politics. this is all about the press conference, the national address that joe biden is scheduled to give from the white house where he gloats we've now convicted donald trump. this is all about november, we are watching election interference, this is the most blatant case of election interference that we have ever seen in our country's history. >> sean: but everything seams to backfire and if you look for example, and i've heard different takes on the issue of the questions that the jury will -- are asking and they will read back tomorrow, but i have to wonder, at those questions be rooted in disagreement in that jury room? >> look, i'm holding out hope. i have to say, i believe in our justice system, i believe in our justice system. >> sean: i don't believe in this system. senator, i said at the beginning, he can't get a fair trial in new york. mar-a-lago is not $18 million either. i stand by it and he did not get a fair trial in new york, regardless of what the outcome is