The Weinstein Case News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

i'm paul gigot. a manhattan jury found donald trump guilty this week on all 34 counts of false iffying business records, the first time in history that a former u.s. president has been convicted of a felony. thursday afternoon's verdict marked a dramatic end to the almost 6-week trial, but trump vowed that the legal fight is not over. >> this was a rigged decision right from day one. with a conflicted judge who should have never been allowed to try this case, never. and we will fight for our constitution. this is far from over. paul: let's bring in jim trusty, a former federal prosec...

♪ >> i did my job. our job is to follow the facts and the law without fear or favor, and that's exactly what we did here. many voices out there, the only voice that matters is the voice of the jury. and the jury has spoke. paul: that was manhattan district attorney alvin bragg on thursday the reacting to donald trump's conviction saying all 34 charges against the former president were based on facts and law and were brought by his office without fear or favor. let's bring in our panel, "wall street journal" columnists dan dan henninger bill mcgurn and editorial board member kyle peterson. ky...

Before this jury. paul: yeah. i just want to tug out this process point you make. are you saying that there is a potential due process of law violation here, that a because in a case like this you are required to give the defense and the jurors notice with some specificity and with some advance notice and clarify what, in fact, are the specific charges here? and i'm not just talking about the baseline charge here, i'm talking about the underlying theories that the prosecution offered about what a trump was trying to cover up supposedly here. is that what you're talking about? >> well, i'm talk...

And they don't trust them on cases coming forward. paul: dobbs being the case that overturned roe v. wade. chief justice roberts wouldn't meet with them, my own view, that's the right decision. why do they get to discuss the ethics when that is decided by the court itself. why are the democrats doing this? >> i think bill's right, i think this is a political campaign. it is a campaign to try to discredit the decisions coming out of the supreme court. it is a campaign to potentially lay the groundwork to adding justices to the supreme court if democrats control the senate and decide to break th...

Judge tilted in that direction. >> yeah. well, i think there's a couple of things. number one, just by nature i'm kind of hesitant to go all in on accusing a judge of anything. if i'm not in the courtroom every day, because you miss the tone in which they're reacting to the attorneys, you miss just the kind of subtle psychology of how a judge is treating either side. and there's a lot of people that are saying without ever setting foot in the courtroom that they know exactly what a makes this judge tick. there's a couple of flashpoints that are of concern, the first being he should have recuse...