>> and welcome to hannity. t, we begin with the obvious joe biden. >> well, he's a train wreck, both mentallintally any, physic. his presidency. that's an unmitigated both at home and abroad. and his campaign is a joke with a few, well, cringeworthy events, actually, one a dayly wn at least. small crowds, no enthusiasted m whatsoever. attending a biden rally is more of a punishmenatsoever t for democratsan filled with anxiety. you know who's going to bexietyn to string two coherent sentences together and then successfullyces and t off stageh is why nobody shows up kind of like today in philly. oh, and joe biden said on the view. either joe is elected or will win. >> we got the tape. wills, they are in a stateespere of panic. they are desperate. so in lieu of any traditional campaign or runningg on on the novel idea of an the answering the question, are you better off tha n you four years ago? well, the democratic party, anh they are now relying on another political tactic. you call it the weaponization of our justice department or simply just call iof ourt lawfar in new york city, alvin bragg and judge juan merchan boguss b case against trump has all the elementsagainst of a left-wingp campaign, includinaigng a politically driven d.a. prosecutors who are activea, in the democratic party. a jury pool from one of the most anti-trumpicts i republican conservative districts in the entire country. and ofn e country course, a park judge who heavily and obviously and clearly favors the prosecution. what we have seen from new york, judge juan merchan, is a disgrace to our constitution and our system of justice. tution a syshe just tipped the against trump time and time agaisc n. osecut he hasio acted as the prosecution's friend and ally. and as i've been saying, basically, here's the scale of justice. he's th he's throwing cinder blocks on the scales of justice. there's no doubt that juan merchan wants trump convicted and he's doing everything well possible to make that happen. haand tonight, more evidence of motions, judicial misconduct, to put it politely. ons jury instructions were., well, not only unconstitutional, but rather insanional but rathey here's former us attorney andy mccarthy explaining motions gift to thee pros prosecution. >> take a look at what's supposedecution.ke a loo to hapa criminal trial is a prosecutor has to prove every elementan of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt. what this judge is telling this in this kind of make it up as you go along new york state i prosecution of federal law is that when they get to the that rainbow and weo th get to the elements of the tffense, the jury doesn' have to be in agreement on what it is exactly that trump did ort what he was trying to commit or conceal when he allegedlybusine his business record. so they're going to give the jury a men g tou of choices and tell the jury that some of them may believe that this was a criminal objective. some of thema may believe something else was, but that they don't have to be unanimous on thaty don't. >> i actually think that's pretty outrageous and novel novl charge and a novel approach to jury instruction. soto according to judge juan merchan, the jury, they don't neeo jud to reach a unanimous decision on that phantom election allegation. n, and the prosecution was never even able to really an unspecified federal election crime that was never or tried anywhere ever in america. apparently judge merchan believes he's above the law and was willing to trampleing to on our constitution at will. now, we know from the 2020 supreme court ruling, judge merchan, you may wantmeboy to pay close attention. somebody will tell you about this show. thisit's ramos versus louisianas i'm sure you've heard of it. you're it, but you've heardme qo of it. let me quote it for you. there cate i"n be no question er that the sixth amendment you unanimity requirement applies to state federal criminal trials equally and the law doesn't stop there. here is the u.s. supreme court ruling cou from andres. the united states, it says, quote unanimity in jury jur verdicts is required where the six and seventh amendments apply. that would be our constitution judge. in criminal cases, this requiremenr const of unanimity extends to all issues. character or degree of the crime, guilt and punishment which are left to the jury. again, quote in criminal, thisxs requirement of unanimity extendto as to all issues. i'll repeat all issues. there's no carve out for biden donating judges like, judge merchan, who hate donald trump. oure's another violation of trump's civil liberties carried out by judgechan juan at the prosecution. according to cornell law. while the sixth amendment of our constitution, it grants all americans the right to know who your accusers are. the nature of the chargesd evid and evidence against you. so what isgainst the election cs that trump is being accused of and who's makinedg the allegation? the prosecution. they never answered these questionosecutios. and now the judge is allowing the jury to choose. wellllowin, pretty much their on adventure. you, whatever crime works fopicr you as long as there's 12 of you. it doesn't matter. the reason you don't have to agree on that justt mattreason,n that you hate the guy and want him to be guilty. it doesn't even need to be to b. unanimous. this is totally unconstitutional. beyondthis is titutional unethi judge merchan is clearly trying to help the prosecutio tryinn get this across the finish line, despite no evidench e of any crime. this after constantly favoringy the constitution to state that the prosecution's sustaining objections, allowing irrelevant, immaterial, dishonest testimony, including misleading speculation, that cohen's prior campaign finance violations are somehow tied to this trial. ainingand you really can't blamm for stealing. you know, he people like he wasy treated badly and not not really a big deal. it came and trump's guilt, by the way. and when it came to the defensea ,merchan lashed out at trump's attorneys, berated trump. a witness bob costello blocked testimony from an expert witness on election law bradley smith, former fec chair, overruled most objections. he placed the restrictive gag order, but only on donald trump. and then he threatened to throw them in jail i, def he daredw hi to violate it. this judge is out of controlm ik and the cards are stacked against donald trump. >> take a look. donatakemother teresa, they cout be these judges. >> these judges are rigged. o he the whole thing is rigged. you have a trial like this t where the judge is so conflicted, he can't breathe. eath hhe's got to do his job, a. >> it's not for me. and i can tell you, it's a disgrace. and i mean that mother teresa d up with this judge.l see, but we'll see. we'll see how we do. >> it's a very disgraceful situation. situbased on the four questions, the request for from jury deliberations today, it appears the jury, you know, is closely studyingdelipear the testimony t and smear campaign presented by the prosecution some believe that is, you know, a conviction that that might forthcoming. make no mistake, a conviction. it won't be a surprise. as a matter of fact, no outcome here will surprise me.ew this is a jury selected from new york city and their voterd r rolls, where biden won just shy of 90% of the vote. this is a jury tainted by a judge juan merchan, who has been anything but fair. democrats have weaponized your system of justice. sythey have shred your constitution in the process. and just imagine for a second if a deep blue, deep red state like, let's say wyoming, idaho, i don't know, alabama cooked up a felony charge against barack obama. they used novel legal theory, te then tried the case before a judge who donated to donald trump. and on top of that dumb cinder blocks on the scales of justicet and pretty much let the prosecution sa lety anything they want even accuse the the defendant of a crime he's not o accused of or constantly say broke the lantly sw when. been a in fact, that should not have been admissible. you think that would sit well, the democratic party in the mob and the media? i don't think so. but tonight, some good news. if trump is convicted, this thi case will gos ca to appealin t and trump will, in the end win. and if he is elected, he will have an important opportunity to restore america'sl have systn of justice. and you know what? i don't care who the presidenth, is if it's a republican president. i would never want this of lawfare, this weaponization of our justice system to be used against anybody i disagree with politicallyt anybod. reactn anyway, here with reaction from the trump organization, eric trump. umganizatihe's been in the courr a better part of this trial. yu you know, i'll let you take it from there. but you know, everything thiitsa judge does in this particular case, erick, to mer , i you kno. at this point, i expect it. it's not even a shock anymor e. y you know, shawn, sometimes i'm angry, sometimes i'm numb fe to it. i i mean, i watch my father go in there every single day and fight for his life, every ant foliterally fight fore against bogus charges. i've said it on the show. i've said it on othershe shod o no one believes that $130,000 from eight years ago for a perfectly legal and a booked a legal expense to a personalme long time lawyer booked as a legal expens lawe is a crime who a former president and the frontrunner for a republican party is charged with 34 felony counts. no one believes that the entirew city of new york is shut down. you have half of the nypd guarding the lower half of manhattan around this trial. they're shutting down the fdr noive everdowny single. no one believes it. and then you have thise judge and i watched the conductm . and shawn, you have to watch it from from the front row, fro t m front and center, as so many rer of the fox reporters have when you're in there. and he is literally sustainingne every single one of their sing, he will not give us a single thing. he's disqualifying our witnesseing, he'ing ous. he's not letting the head of the fec testify that there is no crime here.stillo he's not letting costello speak, not letting him get single word out. >> he's saying that my m father testifies they can go back to every single thing he's ever said or ever done, sa related's not to this case. the thing is, stack shore, you've never seen anything likes it. it wasn't until this morning di morningd they actually outlit six months later what the actual crimehs reportedly was. there is no crime here,is but they didn't even n give the decency of telling my father what it was until they him through the mud every single day, wasted his time, pu dayt him in the icebox for wn and weeks and weeks and weeks. t and that's what this is. this is corruption. this, thata judge they donated to stop republicans. this is ed ta judge that reporth you've reported, everybody's reported has a daughteavr who hs raised millions and millions of dollars based on fund raising for for democratic causes. this is a joke. just somehow gets everyump ca single anti-trump casese- th is really interesting. you've got, you know, the first trump case and he gets this case ig.se, then he gets it waso jury being in this case was selected. he was selected. eric well, of course. sean, that's no different than, fulton county, right? i mean, in georgia, why don't you goo to to fulton county?ut because it says about as far left as you can get. wh auy did they go to downtownft new york because it's about as far left. why did they pick this wh judge? this is a random it would defy every law of every model in history to get this charge on every t trump case, especialy a judge that wasn't even voted in this was an appointed judge. is nn 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 s a screenshot on her social profiles of my father behind bars. and he won't recuse himself after voting. stop republicans. and you have the entire d.a.'s u hae dasoffice on front row ane laughing about this. laug about $130,000 where every single day you have another person stabbed in theees chest on the streets of new york. and that city is goingf new to and it stinks. and there's homelessness all over the placeand . e reason this is their focus. the reason it's their focus is donaleid trump is winning, sean. he's winning. he's winning in the polls. realn is. people realize the democrats finally realize that the guymak will not make it to the finish line. they're panicking. and soh line what do they do? they weaponize the legal system against donald trump aweaponizss they've done every day since he's come down that escalator. downwatch hi, it's frustratingin a son to watch him go through this and this torture. i and that guy is incredible. and honestly, kudos to him. y kudono one else could deal wih this. >> no one ever. no one.i don't know many peoplet could for sure. and it's certainly trucould,ethg that you and your family have been through a lot. and your father, you know, seemh s have a capacity to deal with it, unlike anybody else that i would know. ll we'll watch. we'll see what happens tomorrow. wha and you know, you got to hope that maybe there are people on this jury that see through this. that is that would be my best. i'm not expecting an acquittal. hopefully, a hung jury . >> you know, when you put those menacing cinder blockst on the scales of justice, you know, at some point you risk tipping balance i completely, which i think is what the aim has beens wh frm day one. eric trump, thank you, sir. all right. hereanu sir. with fox news contr george washington university law professor. our friend jonathan turley is back. let's get take on the request for instructions by the juryn ts on these four separate items. separatparker's testimony aboue phone conversation with trump, his about the decision regarding the assignment of thie karen mcdougal's life rights, his testimony about trumpp to and the trump tower meeting, and michael cohen'wes testimonyo about the trump tower meeting. i know we shouldn't read into, e these things, but i've read into it a thousand different ways. dodid intotd everything that i w that i shouldn't do. but i want to get your thoughtts . >> well, sean, is as you'veall sp noted, you know, we're all speculating here, but heck, there's nothing else to do. i'm surprised that some other networks have said, look, thise, is really great news that they sent this out. i got theyt to tell you, as aatn criminal defense attorney, i would not view thieys as clearly good news for the prosecution. the only reasoution.n a jury woy send out a request to hear the instructions again is if there's a disagreement about whats if the are that indicates that there may be a conflic t with jurorsn that in that room about what their standard is,om about how e supposed to look at the evidence. there's various reasons wh.y these particular parts of the testimony would be demanded by the jury. among them is a ratherem i intriguing one. the judge told the jury that if cohen lied, any material fact, e the jury could disregard all of his testimony. now, he noted that that means that you have to look for cooperation of cohen because he is someone who obviouslyst he's not just a serial perjurer ,but he's an accomplice. so they happen to have requested the trump meeting, the h the government cited cooperation for. cohen so it may have that they started logically and say, first of all, can we consideat'i anything that michael cohen has said? and that would leach d them to cooperation, which would lead him to the trump tower meetingsich woul . it would also lead them to theon instruction. now, that's what's going on. not necessarily. that'sssarily. one possibility. the other possibilities includsn that they're looking at this evidence and they're trying to figure ousce and tt what then establish as fact, not just to incensest to in weight or ase the facts. so i don't this such a clearly positive thing fora the prosecution. as a defense attorney, i would welcome this type of request. they were only in there ford th a few hours and asked to hear the instructions again and they asked to hear core testimony. the problem that trump is having remains those instructionsremain. they are very one sidedve and they have converted this into something of a canned hunt. you knowsomething of a, what jun has said is that you could divide four, four, four. you could have three groups thre of jurors who view the facts materially. as they could disagree as to what crime was behind thisbusins effort to falsify business records. t and merchan will still treat that as a unanimous verdic t. that is pretty chilling for people that believe stronglyy fn the criminal justice system and the very high standard of proof that's requirede . as th well, let me ask you about that. the judge saying the underlyina. g underlying election charge doesn't have to be unanimousn c to me would be a reversible error. and what's interesting, i didd t quote two supreme court casese on trace versus the u.s. ramos versus louisiana, which, by the way, a fairly case that was0 ca a 2020 case. and the supreme court, y that unanimity and a jury verdict requiredired is requiree under the sixth and seventh amendments. and the requirements extends to any and alland to find somee guilty. jurors must always agree without dissent on every necessary element t of thed cri. purported crime. now, that is, that could not be any more clear. >> why would he set himself up r for such a reversible erroeverr, >> yeah, he's claiming that, look, there are stil hl unanimos that there was some crime behind all this. k 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 courtroo it's notm. e it's not clear once they vote whether we'll actually knoew what was the crime that they found to elevate this deadeanora misdemeanor back into life and convert it into a felony. ee it's he's we haven't seen those documents in this system. so do i think this is potential reversible error? sure. it's -- it's rather a long list no erroher w of what i think are reversible errors by this judge. i expect him to do more of an effort to cure it. but tht.e judge has to look at this transcript when they read it tomorro when w. you know, at the very end of the hearing, the judge was questioninf thg the defense,e in who wanted to include in the transcript somethingobviousl they thought was obviously material. the jury wants to hear what pecker and cohen said about the trump tower meeting. t s one of the things the defense wants to point out is what was said that not included in thete meeting, merchan indicated he didn't thinhek that ised to something they needed to hear, and my jaw droppedhe. that seems clearly material, so we'll see if he comee wills to e different conclusion in the morning. >> jonathan turley, you as always. joining us now with more is texas senator ted cruz. well, alan dershowitz says. you one of his favorite lost events of all time and one of his best and brightest. alan kir youyour take on all thw we've been discussinhag? well, listen, sean, i've got good news and bad news. the good>> lis is the exchangehg you were just having with jonathan turley is exactlew right. we now know to a virtualw certainty that ntoo conviction o will be upheld on appeal that the judge today committed. i think, clear reversible error. these jury instructions were i. now, here's the bad news. the bad news i is this has been a kangaroo court from the beginning. this from the is a wildly partisan prosecutor who hates donald p trump came with a political objective of going after donald trump. and we now jectiv know from these jury instructions that this judge is