tv America Reports FOX News June 1, 2022 10:00am-12:00pm PDT
>> it was, small world in a big city. >> raymond, final words on the covid cancellation. >> i'm just happy gillian has given us permission to fext, i'll explain it to her when i get home. i'm going to write to but this. >> all right, guys. thanks for spilling the tea. now here is "america reports." >> john: emily, thank you. a roadblock in the investigation into last week's massacre in uvalde. texas d.p.s. officials say the police chief is not responding to a follow-up interview with texas rangers. >> sandra: and the school door they said was propped open by a teacher, the story is changing again. chris swecker will be joining us in moments on that. >> john: begin "america reports" with surging inflation and president biden's plan to fight
it with the midterms fast approaching. sandra, the busiest woman in television. >> sandra: great to be with you this afternoon, john. president meeting with fed chair jay powell yesterday as the white house kicks off a months' long effort to focus, it says, on the economy. but inflation has been on the minds of many voters in this country for months now, especially when filling up their tanks. price of gasoline rising almost daily with the new national average for a gallon, 4.67 today, a jump of 1.60 a year ago, and up $0.05 since yesterday. >> john: 11.4 million unfilled positions. labor shortage driving up wages and keeping inflation high as businesses continue to struggle with hiring.
minnesota congressman and national republican congressional committee chair tom emmer will join us. >> sandra: we head to the white house, peter doocy live from the north lawn to kick things off. hey, peter. >> peter: good afternoon, here at the white house hearing two different things about how we got here. on the one hand for the first time, you have an admission from the treasury secretary they miscalculated how bad inflation was going to get. >> i think i was wrong then about the path that inflation would take as i mentioned there have been unanticipated and large shocks to the economy the boosted energy and food prices and supply bottlenecks that have affected our economy badly this i didn't, at the time didn't fully understand.
>> peter: and then white house officials are telling us to refer all the way back to the state of the union address three months ago to learn about biden's inflation-fighting plan. as in, they are not trying anything new. instead, continuously trying to blame inflation on supply chain issues they say are tied to russia's invasion of ukraine. >> next question, does president biden take any responsibility for his policies potentially contributing to inflation. >> his policies have helped the economy get back on its feet, that's what his policies have done. this -- when we talk about the gas prices right now, this is indeed putin's gas hike. >> peter: prices were, of course, rising before vladimir putin decided to do anything in ukraine, and now there are various reports that president
biden is upset with his communications team for not emphasizing inflation more and sooner. sandra. >> sandra: peter doocy reporting from the white house. thank you, john. >> john: let's bring in minnesota congressman tom emme, chairman of the national republican congressional committee and a lot on his plate between now and november 8th. congressman, good to talk to you. so the white house is kicking off this week, a month-long focus in the economy to communicate the accomplishments, but the poll from the middle of last month. approval rating, 33%. disapproval, 67%. communicating the accomplishments may be an uphill battle. >> well, john, it's amazing, first great to be with you. it's amazing now they are going to concentrate on the economy, quite frankly, they have been concentrating on the for the
past six months and on destroying it. it's -- you go back a year on gas prices, how about going back 16 months when gas prices where i live here in minnesota were about 2.25 a gallon. look, they claim that the gas prices were due to greedy oil companies, actually told us inflation was transitory a year ago, they claimed then that the gas prices were going up and that was greedy oil companies and now trying to blame it on biden. fact of the matter is, john, that one crisis after another has been caused by the policies of this administration. they are directly responsible for the double digit inflation first time in 40 years and also responsible for the run away costs at the gas pump and the grocery store and americans know it. >> john: so the president kicked off this week with an op-ed in the wall street journal outlining a three-point plan to turn the economy around, which includes a, refrain from influencing the fed, b, call on
congress to pass clean energy tax credits and investments, housing more affordable, lower prescription drug costs, and reducing the federal deficit. nothing about increasing domestic energy production to get prices down and the price of oil affect everything. if republicans take control of congress in november what would republicans do to try to tackle inflation, the supply chain crisis, rising price of oil and gas. >> john, you just hit it. most americans do not understand that oil and gas is not just what we put in our gas tanks. oil and gas, all of energy that we have abundant, efficient, and available cost effective energy, is what drives the american economy and frankly our quality of life. and this administration starting 16 months ago when they took office, the first thing they did was kill american energy
independence that had been created under the previous administration with the trump policies. ended the keystone pipeline, stopped exploration and drilling on federal lands and they want to tell you they have preproduction levels, that's not true. they are not granting permits, and because of that they have driven not only the cost of gasoline, the cost of energy skyrocketing high, but they have also driven inflation like we have not seen in 40 years, john. >> john: one other point bears making here, and that is the people who are in charge of getting a handle on inflation, are the people who did not see it coming in the first place, including the fed chairman, jerome powell and janet yellen, listen to what yellen said to cnn. >> i think i was wrong then about the path that inflation would take. as i mentioned there have been
unanticipated and large shocks to the economy that the boosted energy and food prices and supply bottlenecks that have affected our economy badly that i, at the time didn't fully understand but we recognize that now. >> john: larry summers said the warning lights were blinking red yet despite that, the folks in charge of the administration were whistling past the graveyard. >> yeah, larry summers, the -- the testimony of the treasury chair right now range hollow in light of what larry summers was telling this administration and this president 16 months ago. he warned them, if you destroy american energy independence, flood the economy with more money, $1.9 trillion, on top of 800 billion yet to be spent from the previous airs act, and
you've got a consumer base, the citizens who have been locked up for over a year, you are going to let them out and start consuming you are going to have problems. they saw this coming. they tried to blame it on anything but themselves. they are directly responsible for the inflation, gas prices, one crisis after the next and one reason the americans will show up in november and change leadership in this country. >> john: it's going to be an interesting race, no question about that. tom emmer, thank you for joining us. >> sandra: great conversation, super great question to ask what republicans are able to do if they retake control, we could still be at a point of sky high inflation and sky high gas prices come the november election. >> john: so far there's no plan that's articulated, other than rick scott's which has not really met with favor among republicans. >> sandra: except increasing oil supply. >> john: two specific things in
there met with some criticism and ridicule by some republicans. but we are hearing that toward the end of the summer, beginning of summer, republicans will have a plan. >> sandra: a panel coming up, art laffer, economist from the reagan era, ask him about the plans the republicans could put out to win support and the rollout by the white house. and colin mcshane will join us as well. funerals are underway for some of the victims in uvalde, texas. the city has just two funeral homes, which are now burdened with the task of burying 21 of their fellow community members. services for 12 victims held this week. senior correspondent casey stegall is in uvalde for us, another sad day for that community, casey. >> yes, sandra, it really is, and we are at the ever-growing
public memorial in the town square. we have gn here every day, and overwhelming to see the families come here and cry and of course be hugged and be consoled by members of the community. according to texas d.p.s., the police chief of the school district about an initial interview with investigators right after the shooting. however, they say that he has not responded for three days for follow-up interview requests. he was sworn in behind the scenes yesterday in a private ceremony for the new city council seat he was just elected to in may. texas d.p.s. released another version of events, now saying that the door through which the shooter entered was not propped open as they initially said. the teacher closed it and it did not lock automatically as it should have. remember, it was ultimately a u.s. border patrol tactical team that ended the horror, breaching
the classroom and killing the shooter. >> as i went in i saw a whole bunch of kids running out, running off campus, jumping through the windows, cops breaking windows, and complete chaos, pretty much. >> funerals and visitation services continue today. 10-year-old elona torres, at such a young age, loving and compassionate person with a smile that could light up your soul. it will take two and a half weeks for all of the services to be held because of only two mortuaries in town. it's a full two and a half weeks schedule juggling services each day. >> sandra: isn't imagine what they are going through. casey, thanks so much. and john, still so many remaining questions about what exactly happened, as far as the timeline, who was where, when, and people want answers.
>> john: the fact that the police chief arradondo was telling police officers to stay out of the school and the tactical team for the border patrol said forget that, we are going in. the lessons were learned in 1999 in columbine, and i think a lot of people are a lack of understanding as to why this was almost a repeat of that with the police outside as long as they did. >> sandra: chris swecker will be here with that and more. >> john: john hinckley, the man who shot president ronald reagan in 1981, will have a full unconditional release. he has been living on his own with only light supervision. a federal judge ordering full release on june 15th saying if he had tried to kill anyone beside the president he would have been unconditionally set
free a long time ago. >> sandra: and one of the biggest issues facing the american people right now. sky high gas prices. you are likely seeing prices much higher than that where you live, and a brand-new report that says it is the one problem that rules them all inside the white house. so, why hasn't there not been a fix to this problem yet. sean duffy and jenna arnold will weigh in. >> john: a recall in the pennsylvania primary, dr. mehmet oz with a razor thing lead. and the legal battle over the mail-in ballots. >> you can't change the rules as is what's happening here, you can't change the rules after election. veteran homeowners. skyrocketing home prices are breaking records. now is the time to turn your home equity into cash.
you can get at least 25% more cash at newday than you get at a bank. 25% more cash to make home improvements. 25% more cash to pay bills. 25% more cash for retirement. call now and get an average of $60,000. veterans get more at newday usa. my a1c stayed here, it needed to be here. ruby's a1c is down with rybelsus®. my a1c wasn't at goal, now i'm down with rybelsus®. mom's a1c is down with rybelsus®. (♪ ♪) in a clinical study, once-daily rybelsus® significantly lowered a1c better than a leading branded pill. rybelsus® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction.
serious side effects may include pancreatitis. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. need to get your a1c down? (♪ ♪) ask your healthcare provider about rybelsus® today. i brought in ensure max protein, with thirty grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks! (sighs wearily) here i'll take that! (excited yell) woo-hoo! ensure max protein. with thirty grams of protein, one gram of sugar, and nutrients to support immune health.
>> john: aaa is warning gas prices could sharply increase over the next few weeks, but so far every plan that the white house has to stop the pain at the pump reportedly has too many drawbacks or won't work. panel sounds off on all that in just moments. but first, a supreme court ruling affecting mail-in ballots adding to uncertainty surrounding the republican senate primary in pennsylvania. less than 1,000 votes separate dr. mehmet oz and david mccormick, all this two weeks after election day. bryan llenas has been following the race, what did the supreme court decide in this case, bryan. >> temporary stay halting the counting of mail-in ballots in pennsylvania at least until the
supreme court weighs in on this issue which could happen any day now. the question is whether mail-in ballots received on time but missing the required handwritten date on the outer envelope should count. third circuit court of appeals said yes, voter written dates on envelopes do not matter because ballots are time stamped anyway. the supreme court could now overturn that decision. there are some 800 or so g.o.p. undated ballots up for grabs that could impact the primary in pennsylvania. dr. mehmet oz leads mccormick by 900 votes. automatic recount must be complete next week. yesterday both campaigns argued in commonwealth court over the fate of the undated ballots needing votes to close the gap with oz. mccormick campaign says they should count.
republican national committee arguing undate the ballots should not count and the courts should not usurp the pennsylvania election law which requires voters to write the date on the ballot. >> follow the rule that is set. people are en franchised by having the right in america to vote. they need to follow the rules and you can't change the rules as is what's happening here, you can't change the rules after election. >> the mccormick campaign is calling on the courts to force 12 counties to recount votes by hand they believe fraud or error may have led to a missed count of votes. we shall see, john. >> john: look likes it's going to be a while. >> the results have to be in june 8th according to state law. >> john: see if they can make that. bryan, thank you.
>> sandra: record high gas prices continue to be a headache, ways to bring down the prices, including relaxing some of those climate rules. so far they say none of them would work. let's bring in sean duffy, former wisconsin congressman and jenna arnold, welcome to you both. and feels so good to have everyone on set here. so, welcome. yes, i know. this is good. jenna, to you first. this is obviously a democratic administration that has huge problems on its hands, top of the list rights politico, the white house's one problem that rules them all, gas prices. there really is not one silver bullet, the, as i said, one person familiar with the discussions, it's a difficult issue to message around when you cannot deny the reality. they have tried to deny the reality for quite some time, pinning it on the war in ukraine, ok, had multiple avenues where they said it was not -- it was transitory, the
inflation would not last, so now what is the administration going to do about it? >> i appreciate you pointing out the undenyability, whether it's policy or inflation or happening in the far off countries and at every intersection we drive through we are able to track what the prices are ourselves. and gas is something that everysun intimately familiar with in terms of how they are getting their kids to school and going back and forth to their jobs and it's hard for me to look at this crisis and not be focussed how we are going to avoid the same exact conversation in a number of decades from now, and look at all the policies the current administration is bringing to the table by way of releasing crude oil, by increasing opportunities for more petroleum companies to do more drilling, but the truth -- but the real
question becomes, how do we continue to avoid this and invest -- >> sandra: there's time for that, certainly. right now the american people, they are suffering today. >> we can do both, do both. >> sandra: many republicans, sean you, tell me, administration tried to replace fossil fuels with green energy but did not have an immediate solution for that. there was not enough availability. >> right. there's not an immediate solution to replacing oil and gas. and so when you attack it and get less oil and gas you are going to see prices rise. but as an american, i'm happy with the word out of the white house, they think about it every day they know americans are feeling a ton of pain at the pump, they know it's a massive political problem, but when they sat down with oil executives, they said listen, you have to build more pipelines and you have to lift environmental restrictions on us and nt can do it in the short-term. give us the long-term runway. investments in oil and gas is not just for a year. it takes a decade or two to
start making money off the investments, so actually produce oil and bring it to market and make money off it as opposed to giving us a runway for a year and then changing the rules on us where we will lose a ton of cash. give them certainty and regulation, build pipelines to move the oil and gas and the country and if they did that, we would see more investment and then prices start to come down. >> sandra: and speaking of timing, if people are suffering today it might affect how they are going to vote in november. larry summers of multiple democratic administration's said this on cnn this morning. listen. >> i think the test is going to come over the next six months. the temptation is always to stop the antibiotic as soon as you feel better and that can often be the wrong thing to do that makes the problem come back
later. >> sandra: he's talking about the huge cache the federal reserve has to tackle the inflation problem saying it's going to have to be aggressive on raising the interest rates to tame inflation but it could inflict a lot of pain on the u.s. economy and the jobs market in the meantime. >> and reiterate here, this is a global problem. austria, germany, united kingdom increase in 54% in their heating costs over this past winter going into next year, who knows what's going to happen with russia. potential to get worse. i think it's important for viewers to recognize our relationship with natural gas is not just pegged with this administration or former, but decades in the making where we have not invested in alternatives. >> do you think that makes anybody feel better? >> no, it doesn't. people want action from the white house and saying we are going to release oil from the strategic reserve does not make me feel better. >> sandra: certainly has not brought prices down. >> inflation, america is one of
the worst for seeing inflation rise in our country and again, you have to stop spending and feel the pain, you have to raise rates, it's going to be painful, but the future is going to be bright. if they wait, and you know this all too well, you wait, the pain will be incredibly bad for a long period of time. >> sandra: how paul vol kert handle this, short-term pain for long-term gain. >> john: the white house reversing course on sending long range rocket systems to ukraine. they come with one condition. >> sandra: and mexican cartels, officials say parts of the border are controlled by them. what is right now being done about it. retired acting i.c.e. director tom homan will join us on that. >> the cartels are controlling the border versus law enforcement, and we've got to go after and build cooperation going after reducing the influence of the cartels. first psoriasis, then psoriatic arthritis.
even walking was tough. i had to do something. i started cosentyx®. cosentyx can help you move, look, and feel better... by treating the multiple symptoms of psoriatic arthritis. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting...get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections some serious... and the lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms... or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. tell your doctor if your crohn's disease symptoms... develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. watch me. ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx.
>> sandra: president biden's immigration policies are emboldening mexican cartels and taking advantage of the border crisis. tom homan breaks down which sectors are targeted the most and why in a moment. but first. to this fox news alert, more about the advanced rocket systems the white house will send to ukraine as part of the latest weapons package. a new report suggests long range rocket systems will be part of the $700 million deal. troops would be able to hit targets more precisely from a further distance. the president has stressed his administration is not encouraging or enabling ukraine to strike outside of their border into russia, john. >> john: a group of g.o.p. lawmakers touring the border as
the cartels smuggle thousands of migrants in the brutal summer heat, and they found cocaine last week. and good to see you, tom. thanks for coming in. run some figures here, we have a map of the southern border and various sectors of where the action is, of course the most active is the rio grande valley sector, 42,000 crossings during the month of april, following that is del rio, 41,000 crossings. and then next we have el paso, and that was 30,000, so a lot of people coming across the border here. yuma section is about 27,000, and then tucson, which is becoming more and more active, about 25,000. so as we get into the summer how do you expect those numbers are
going to change? >> rio grande valley and back in my day it was san diego sector, that moved the traffic further east. i think will you see an uptick in rio grande valley and del rio. but right now yuma is on fire. they are getting overrun, and easy, because once you get across the border in yuma, you lost, you are in the city of yuma. the cartels want to spread the groups across the southwest border because now that title 42 is in place, single adults are not looking to turn themselves in, they are looking to get away. the cartels are active on pushing huge family groups to tie the border patrol up to move the people who don't want to get arrested and fentanyl and other drugs in unprotected regions. >> this is a very treacherous crossing area here, that's the sonoran desert and it gets hot this time of year. >> i'm surprised the numbers are
increasing, you are going to see the migrant deaths. now that illegal immigration continues to rise, you'll see more deaths down there, and that's why specifically in tucson you have the largest ment an of got-aways, less infrastructure there, less border patrol there, more got-aways and more deaths because they are not rescued. >> john: who knew what when and what they are doing about it. report customs and border put out, saying trans national criminal organizations will exploit migrant flows, and endanger vulnerable individuals, feed cartel violence in mexico and along the border and volatile border environment. c.b.p., d.h.s. knew this was coming. did they rise to the challenge? >> no, they didn't. they got rid of the policies
under the trump administration, and the most secure border. when you do away with the secure border and open the border, the t.c.o.s are making more money, and not only human smuggling but narcotics. people that don't want to get arrested flow. they are taking advantage of it, and see so much violence in mexico. the cartels are fighting for space, so much money being made. >> john: you mention drugs, where were they seized? $2.7 million worth of cocaine seized in the town of laredo, also other seizures here in brownsville and across the border. the big bend sector, you get a lot of cross border smuggling. not a lot of people come through that area. >> and you are going to see a rise in the big bend sector.
viewer resources, treacherous crossing. so the regular migrants, family groups are not going to cross there, it's too treacherous, it's tough. you will see a lot of drugs not only smuggled but getting away, we lack the resource and such a huge national park you cannot cover it. >> john: you mentioned a big wall that stretches pr the pacific ocean over to the arizona border. smugglers are getting creative, we saw the tunnel created between tijuana and san diego. you know, you put up a wall, what was it somebody said show me a ten foot wall, highly show you a 20 foot ladder. >> 1987, i was involved in the largest cocaine seizure of a truck coming across in california, i went back there two years ago, big beautiful wall there, no truck full of cocaine is coming through the area. it has reduced illegal drug flow. they are going to find ways around it but the technology the border patrol has now, they are seizing a lot but here is the
issue. there's more getting away than seizing. drugs are getting away, it's causing over 100,000 overdose deaths in the country. >> john: tom, it's going to be a long, hot summer. appreciate you coming in. >> sandra: if you hit the beach, you were not alone. multiple shark sightings on the east coast like this one thrashing around on a long island beach. and new warnings for beach goers. >> john: u.k. getting ready to kick off a platinum celebration in honor of queen elizabeth. what you can expect coming up next. if you're a veteran, own your home, and need cash, call newday usa. i'm tatiana, here to say you can get an average of $60,000 with the newday 100 cash out loan. that's at least 25% more cash than you get at a bank.
it lowers your payments by an average of $600 a month, too. with today's soaring home values, the time to turn your equity into cash is right now. ubrelvy helps u fight migraine attacks. u put it all on the line. u do it all. so u bring ubrelvy. it can quickly stop migraine in its tracks within 2 hours... without worrying if it's too late or where you are. unlike older medicines, ubrelvy is a pill that directly blocks a protein believed to be a cause of migraine. do not take with strong cyp3a4 inhibitors. most common side effects were nausea and tiredness. migraine pain relief starts with u. learn how abbvie can help you save. ask about ubrelvy, the anytime, anywhere migraine medicine. when tired, achy feet make your whole body want to stop, it's dr. scholl's time. our insoles are designed with unique massaging gel waves, for all-day comfort and energy. find your relief in store or online.
it's still the eat fresh refresh, and now subway's refreshing their italians. like the new supreme meats, topped high with new italian-style capicola. that's one handsome italian. uh... thanks. not you, garoppolo! ♪♪ subway keeps refreshing and refreshing and refres- you know liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need? like how i customized this scarf? check out this backpack i made for marco. only pay for what you need. ♪liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪
depp and his ex-wife amber heard. this is the $50 million libel lawsuit against amber heard. she testified that depp physically and assaulted her on multiple occasion. the jury has reached a verdict with the $100 million counterclaim that heard filed against depp. she says she was defamed when his lawyer called her abuse allegations as we know a hoax. so, john, what we were initially told earlier today was that when a verdict is reached the court will give the media an hour or so to collect and then the verdict will be read. so, looking at the clock, 1:43 eastern time, we could get it in the next hour or so. >> john: they have given us plenty of time to get our ducks in order. mark meredith is covering this
for us. the jury gave this a reasonable amount of time, they were into their third day deliberating for about a total of 13 hours or so beforehanding a note to the judge saying they had come up with a verdict. it will be interesting to see what they had to say. did amber heard defame johnny depp in the op-ed she wrote for "washington post" and what about the countersuit. some people have wondered why this was in fairfax, virginia, as opposed to someone where else, it was written in "washington post" and it is published out in fairfax county. that's why it ended up in the courts there. >> sandra: it has gathered a lot of attention, streaming throughout the day on many different outlets, including our own and people have been watching this. they have been paying attention. it's gotten very strange at times. but he is accusing her of defamation, it was the 2018
op-ed she wrote describing herself as a public figure representing domestic abuse. so we should hear soon as the verdict has been reached and we will certainly go to the reading of that verdict when it happens. mark meredith has the latest on what we are hearing. hi, mark. >> good afternoon to you. just about an hour and 15 minutes from now we will know what the jury has to say, seven people, five men and two women as we are trying to find out what they have to say about this fascinating trial that has taken place for more than six weeks, and some interest internationally. you have the hollywood aspect of it, johnny depp so well-known from the "pirates of the caribbean," but also his ex-wife, also an actress, detailed what she went through and kind of peeked behind the curtain of what the marriage was like with a hollywood superstar, and what their careers have gone through since they were married.
one of the fox colleagues, just how toxic the relationship appeared to be in both of their eyes. we heard about the abuse claims that amber heard leveled against johnny depp. depp of course denied all of them saying she was the one responsible for much of thing aer and frustration and issues in the marriage, and she insisted she would not have gone out with the op-ed in 2018 if she didn't think the claims were true and didn't have a reason to speak up. we talked also about the social media aspect of this, even amber heard has said she felt she was being harassed online, even as the trial was ongoing, people were ready to pick on her from all over the world, from behind their keyboards and she felt this was also something that needed to be said, that people needed to know what was happening in terms of harassment from fans on eat side of this case from that matter. we also have to talk here about the suit itself. you mentioned the $50 million lawsuit that johnny depp filed and the counterclaim,
$100 million counterclaim. a lot of the money, it's huge to all of us, unthinkable amount of money. but what the clients are saying here is that they believe because of their own careers, the hollywood blockbuster, the money over the years, not to mention the anguish and the spectacle they have had to go through here they felt that was the money owed. we knew the jury would reach a unanimous decision and we will know in an hour and 13 minutes, and why we are talking about it, the case was televised. cameras in the courtroom and in virginia it's quite rare. you don't see johnny depp in a virginia courthouse every day and saw the fans that would come out to the courthouse on a daily basis, sometimes waiting hours and hours for a chance to get in the courtroom. my colleague, david spunt had been out there covering it several times and told me on the phone once it was amazing how many people would try to crowd into there on a daily basis to
get a glimpse what was going on. the producer on the ground said there was not a noticeable crowd outside the courthouse today, that they were likely going to come later in the afternoon assuming the verdict would be reached. the third day of deliberations, they started on friday, a full day yesterday and now obviously we are to mid afternoon today. as whether or not things actually start on time, anyone's guess. johnny depp was overseas performing on stage with a rock band in the u.k. the last few days and i can't imagine he's back already. they have daily flights between heathrow and dulles, but a lot of interest to see what it's like in the courtroom once the verdict is read. >> john: generational gap, johnny depp playing with a rock band. he was playing with jeff beck and anybody who follows rock and roll, knows jeff beck is a legend. so, he was playing with the legendary jeff beck in london over the weekend doing some jimi
hendrix stuff, john lennon, marvin gaye but we understand he stayed in the u.k. for business reasons and he will not be there, mark, when this verdict is read out. let me ask you this question, though. because there were rumors that johnny depp had pushed kate moss, his former girlfriend in the 1990s down the stairs. and amber heard was sort of dancing around that idea suggesting that johnny depp was violent, but nobody was ever going to call kate moss because it had been, she had been kept out of the trial, until one fateful day when amber heard said she had been wrestling with johnny depp on the stairs, her sister intervened and at that moment she thought that johnny depp was going to push her sister down the stairs and all i could think of, she said, was kate and the stairs. which then opened the door for the defense to bring kate moss
in. was that a turning point in the trial? >> i think it certainly is going to be one element of it, a turning point. so many scandalous details brought out throughout this whole system and so there was one question, too, if you believe one thing, do you believe them all. obviously you are right, kate moss's testimony was fascinating, and obviously brought up a lot of interest in their past relationship. but i think again for a lot of people are going to be curious to see which side of the jury is going to believe here. there were so many scandalous details, johnny depp talking about it was amber heard abusive towards him and using alcohol and drugs. heard claiming the opposite, that it was going to be johnny depp that was constantly drunk or stoned, and that was treating people horribly, including his wife at the time. service such a short marriage but peek behind the curtain from the system you can imagine what the families have been going through. john, sandra. >> sandra: getting a little color about the way he is
spending his time as john brought to everyone's attention, he's not going to be back for of the verdict to be read, he'll stay in the u.k. and he's been up on the stage with the guitarist that john noted. sorry, i'm just reading now that fox news has details that he's been camped out at the ritz carlton. that's during the trial. there was color on exactly how he was spending his days during the trial, eating chicken parmesan. i don't know how relevant, r ed wine also on the menu. we are joined by a criminal attorney, thank you for joining us, mark. looking for any detail we can. johnny depp will not be in the courtroom to hear the verdict read, he doesn't have to be there, we know that. but here we go after a much anticipated decision we may finally have one. >> yeah, to me it's very simple. the question is what she wrote,
was it constitutionally protected. it doesn't even have to be true, it just has to mean that in her mind she believed that she was a domestic violence victim and thus what she wrote was not with actual malice. it's that simple. so, 99% of what she said could have been absolutely false, if the jurors find that, so what. if 1% of what she said evidences her belief she was a domestic violence victim, what she wrote is constitutionally protected and not defamatory. >> john: mark, you were saying some weeks ago it's not a high bar at all for amber heard to have to leap in order to prove her case. but when you take a look at kate moss's testimony, beat back all the allegations that johnny depp was an abusive boyfriend, and abusive person, i mean, that seemed to poke a lot of holes in the case amber heard was trying to, in the story that amber heard was trying to thread.
>> that's correct. and i think the jurors will make the findings that they did not believe some or maybe a lot of what she said but that's not the burden of proof in a criminal case. court of public opinion, people look at it like a spectator sport. on team heard or team depp and root for them. that's not what it's about in a court of law. the issue again is whether she used actual malice in writing this, whether what she wrote was completely defamatory and i cannot imagine a jury will say there's no way she could have felt like a victim at any point due to the verbal and/or physical abuse that she was surrounded by. >> sandra: adding to what we know, we just reported, johnny depp will not be in the room, he will remain in the u.k. we heard from david spunt. david spunt is also adding that amber heard will be in the court for the verdict to be read.
noting that it is unusual and certainly notable that depp would not be there in person after sitting through the trial six weeks. amber heard will be present in the courtroom. mark. it is unusual and it doesn't matter, they are done. the minute they go and shut the door and deliberate he does not have to be there, they have a verdict, not a question. if it was a question, they would want to see him there. but it doesn't matter. court of public opinion, disappointed, everybody wants the money shot, the reaction of either party after the verdict. so it's frustrating. >> john: so mark, the jury deliberated for three days, they did not deliberate for eight hours every day, a total of about 13 hours of deliberation. sometimes you can read the tea leaves by the amount of time a jury deliberates. the longer it goes on, the more likely to end up in either a hung jury or perhaps a decision
that's not favorable to the defendant. this is right in the sweet spot. what does that tell you? >> it means nothing. amount of time, it was not quick, it was not long, nobody knows anything. i'll tell you this, i would have asked for one of my patented five-minute verdicts, why? i would say go back there, pick a foreperson and then just read the passages that they are claiming are defamatory. and this, by the way, is bigger than amber heard, i would say. it's about all of our constitutional freedoms. if you decide what she wrote was defamatory, then when you want to write something from your experience you've got to be careful because they are going to say oh, no, you cannot do that, and that is unconstitutional. >> sandra: all right. mark, being if you could stand by, you know, we are giving guidance as to when the verdict will be read. that could come sooner than we expect. estimated time and multiple outlets have reported this, it would be approximately 3:00 p.m. eastern time.
originally the court said an hour after the jury came forward with the verdict, sooner than 3:00, so we are watching out for it. and mark, you'll stand by with us on the breaking news coverage. >> john: if the judge knows anything about television programming, he'll do it at 3:00 straight up, we will see. we'll be right back with more "america reports" right after this. veteran homeowners, this is the best time in history to turn your home equity into cash. because home values have climbed to all time highs. and so has your equity. turn it into cash now. the newday 100 va cash out loan lets you borrow up to 100% of your home's value. you could take out more than $60,000. use it to improve your home. pay off high rate debt. pay for big expenses. or put it in the bank for real peace of mind. turn your equity into cash with the newday100 va cash out loan call now.
♪ ♪ dry eye symptoms keep driving you crazy? inflammation in your eye might be to blame. time for ache and burn! over-the-counter eye drops typically work by lubricating your eyes and may provide temporary relief. those'll probably pass by me. xiidra works differently, targeting inflammation that can cause dry eye disease. xiidra? no! it can provide lasting relief. xiidra is approved to treat the signs and symptoms of dry eye disease. don't use if you're allergic to xiidra. common side effects include eye irritation, discomfort or blurred vision when applied to the eye, and unusual taste sensation. got any room in your eye? ask your doctor if a 90-day prescription is right for you. and pay as little as $0.
>> sandra: fox news alert, we were told moments ago a verdict has been reached in the johnny depp/amber heard defamation trial. johnny depp suing his ex-wife for $50 million. she's counter suing him for $100 million. we are told that there will be a verdict on both of those cases, interesting to note, because john, along the way we kept asking whether or not that would happen separately or at the same time. so we'll learn a whole lot more in the coming minutes as to
where the jury found these allegations. you know, you think about just before memorial day weekend, the jurors deliberated for two hours, then they broke for the memorial day weekend, they returned tuesday to continue weighing this case and here we are today with the breaking news, john. >> john: clearly not a match made in heaven, this marriage, so very intriguing to see what the jury rules in this case. mud that was flung in the courtroom over the course of the trial was pretty, pretty serious. so -- >> sandra: absolutely. >> john: and if you are a juror weighing the information that you heard, how do you rule? >> sandra: indeed. mark meredith, set it up for us as we begin a new hour we could get the verdict. >> good afternoon. like you said in less than an hour we are expecting to learn what the jury has to say, five men, two women, trying to decide whether johnny depp or amber heard should get millions over
the claims, defamation claims. back in 2018 amber heard published an op-ed in the "washington post," published in virginia, why it's taking place in fairfax, virginia, she had a specific line, i was just pulling it up here, she talked what it was like to be a domestic abuse survivor and in that op-ed she did not mention johnny depp by name. however, depp has claimed that was also very clear as a signal to anyone who google her name or know who she was, who she was talking about. since then, we have seen amber heard counter sue claiming depp's attorneys were defaming her, she's suing for $100 million. so fascinating about this case, it's televised, streamed for people over the world to watch, what the marriage was like between two people in hollywood, some of the most high profile people in hollywood and a sense it was not always the smiles and the champagne and the red carpet
so many people are used to or accustomed to seeing with hollywood, and horrific details what they felt the relationship was going through. amber heard claimed johnny depp was repeatedly drunk and stoned and erratic and abusive behavior. and you heard the opposite from mr. depp's team which that of course it was amber heard pushing the boundaries to the relationship and he felt she was in an abusive stance and he was ready to move on. but it certainly got nasty. you would hear these back and forth, these questions, comments, every eye roll, every glance, give us an idea what each person was thinking, even if it was not being said out loud. you really tried to read the body language there. we have had the jury deciding since friday early afternoon and then they had the full day of deliberations yesterday. they did ask the judge a question yesterday, clarification, whether or not they should consider the headline which was part of the "washington post" op-ed as part
of the entire thing in terms of their defamation claim. that was answered by the judge yesterday and deliberation continue today. we are expecting 3:00 for the verdict to be read. one thing interesting to see, how many people are racing to the courthouse in fairfax. there has been a large crowd of people interested that come out every day to try to get seats, get in, a sense of what was happening behind the scenes. even on twitter today somebody had like a "pirates of the caribbean" fake pirate ship outside the courthouse. we know there's been a lot of media attention on the case since the beginning, not only because you have johnny depp, so well-known in hollywood, but also have the very public feud playing out here and you mentioned some of the other celebrities brought up into this trial ever since the beginning. our colleagues at the justice department report johnny depp will not be in the courthouse today. he's been overseas as john well
knows at this point, and that we know amber heard will be in the courtroom this afternoon. so, looking to see whether or not there is any instant reaction. i would imagine we'll hear from the legal teams afterwards, press conference outside the courthouse, but so much attention and people curious to see what happens after the verdict is read. 55 minutes and counting. >> john: and johnny depp was in london over the weekend playing with legendary guitarist jeff beck, at the royal albert hall. there you see on the left hand of the screen. johnny depp with what, me worried attitude, getting up there with the famous rock star. but mark, when it comes to what the jury had to weigh in this trial, i mean, it was -- he said/she said to the max, everything there the description
of a tender unfolding love story to allegations of abuse, to poop in a bed. i mean -- how do you sort that all out? >> well, they are going to have to look to see whether or not the headlines were defamatory in the op-ed, go back to the root of the cause. so many interesting details and sad to see any marriage dissolve into anything like this. but you are right, in terms of what the jury has to decide, they are going to have to decide if the headline and the passages from the op-ed were defamatory and whether or not this was done intentionally, whether it was done to be wrong, and their chance to try to get revenge on each other. i also think it will be interesting to see what amber heard's counterclaim, suing for $100 million, it's not nothing and i don't have any clue what the jury will decide on that amount, if they feel there is justice, we will know for sure in a bit here. you talk about what the after effects of this trial are going to be. imagine if you are warners brothers or another movie
studio, do i bring johnny depp to be part of my next picture and you hear about the stories, hear about what he was like behind the scenes, whether drugs or alcohol, and what his behavior was like on movie sets, whether or not you want to allow him to continue in that line of work. also seen the same claims from amber heard who said she's had trouble continuing to secure, would in the movie business since these allegations have come forth. a very ugly public spectacle underway, and people are curious what the jury has to say. >> john: her role in "aquaman 2" was cut back, maybe the allegations played that that. thank you. >> sandra: you are hanging on for the verdict to be read with us and i want to note defamation claims filed in the country by public figures and have you add to it like an actor, thought of
as difficult cases to win due to the higher standard a plaintiff must prove, in 1964, supreme court, defamation suit not not only say the claims were false and caused damage but the person who did the defamatory statement did so with actual malice. >> yeah, see, that's going to be the crux of this case. because we are dealing with two very famous people and they have dueling defamation cases, they have to show the other one acted with actual malice. johnny depp and his team did a good job in showing if anybody acted with malice here, most likely amber. why? because she spent a lot of time engaged in what i'm going to
call a campaign of untruth. a lot of footage of her filming her husband in horrible compromising positions, number one. what does that? is that malicious, it could be interpreted as such. and basis for the case, she held herself out to be an ambassador of domestic violence and domestic abuse yet there was ample evidence she was the opposite. she was committing acts of domestic violence and domestic abuse. will that equate to malice in the eyes of the jury. that's the most difficult legal conumdrum facing this jury. >> john: so jonna, walk us through the minds of the jurors as you have known it to be, if you are a juror and you have to weigh all of this information and you really don't know what's true and what's a lie, how do you sift through that
information to make a prudent decision? >> that's a great question. and the law tries to make that precise question easy for a jury. how? a specific jury instruction available in almost every case of any nature that says to the jury, listen, if you think that a witness has testified falsely in any regard, then you can disregard the entirety of that witness's testimony. how does that play out in this case? for example, if the jury collectively believes, and amber heard again, if amber heard lied about something in her testimony and the jury disbelieves one thing, they can discount everything she said. the jury does not have to say well, she was telling the truth about, a, but lies about b, but could have been telling the truth about c. no, she lied once, we don't have to give her deference on
anything else she testified to and that does take a little bit of the burden off the jury because they can throw out all of what she said, and then just consider the rest of what is left at this trial and i suspect, my gut is telling me that the jury has ample opportunity not to believe her, and not just from the words that came out of her mouth but plenty of witnesses who came forward with no dogs in the fight, who eventually attacked her credibility or undermined her credibility, and they had no reason to do so other than they were called to provide testimony. that's it. >> sandra: ok. so, are you leaning one direction or another, then, at this point, jonna? >> i am. i'm actually leaning towards team depp, and not doing it sandra because i'm an uber fan. i am a fan, but that's not why. i really think johnny depp's
team did a great job in undermining amber heard's credibility, and these cases, this case in particular and all defamation cases, hinge on who is telling the truth, why, because truth is an absolutely defense. so it's more important than ever, especially in the defamation case, that if somebody is not telling the truth, that's going to undermine the entire thing, and amber got caught in some incredible lies and some of those lies by her own testimony and by her own deeds. the jury is going to weigh that. >> sandra: when you and i were covering the trial when it first began, it was notable, amber heard when the camera was on her a while, how she would stare at him on the stand, eyes locked on him while he would speak and quite the opposite when she was testifying and he would not look at her. >> john: you know, he was always
looking down, for the most part looking down. and some people thought that he was doodling. you know, like o.j. simpson but he was listening, you could see small reactions, particularly when she brought up kate moss, a visible reaction there. in terms of the cross examination, jonna, people are saying johnny depp's opportunity, camille vasquez was a rock star here. >> i would agree when she cross examined amber, she did a fantastic job and she deserves kudos for that. she was very prepared and if johnny depp wins, it is probably going to be because in part his lawyers were very well prepared. perhaps they outlawyered amber heard's lawyers. your case is usually only as good as the evidence you can present. evidence you can present and the
source of that evidence. and they knew, look, this case was a long time in the making, they had ample depositions, a lot of information, they had pictures. if you are not a celebrity, you are not getting a picture taken by the paparazzi and showing up in the magazine and then have the pictures prove you to be a liar but that's what we had in this case. marshalled the evidence fantasticically, snow when to use it and used it. they did a great job. the facts appear to be on their side. >> sandra: ok. jonna, if you can hang with us as we could be a few minutes away now from that verdict being read. thank you. >> john: stay with us. this is going to happen any moment announcement bring in mark, criminal defense attorney, he's still with us. let me get your take about this idea that if the jury looks at amber heard's testimony and says
ah, she lied about this, we are going to throw her whole testimony out. what do you think? >> ok, yes, that's possible, it can be done in cases, i've seen it, i've done it myself. but this is different. jurors can find she lied, it's ok, she can lie but the question is did she lie about being a domestic violence victim and thus does she lose constitutional protection by writing about it. so the only issue is did she lie and to the extent we are talking about actual malice, she knew what she was writing was false and intentionally wrote it. that's the legal burden, when she wrote the following, i felt the full course of our culture wrath for women spoke out on domestic abuse. was she in her mind, i believe she believes she was. that does not reach the legal
standard. i spoke up against sexual violence and faced our cultural wrath over this. ok, she did speak up, and is that a complete bold face lie that she doesn't get constitutional protection. and finally, the system apparently protects men more than women, that's her opinion. and again, if we take away her right to say that, even if she's lying about a whole host of other things, take away her right to say that we lose our first amendment freedom. >> sandra: looking at some events around the courthouse, you saw the videos of the "pirates of the caribbean" bus trolling outside the courthouse there. nancy grace this morning was making the case if it's found out a juror saw that, she could come back and say this whole case has could be reseen. do you agree with that? >> no, i love my dear friend nancy, sounds great for tv but
in reality, them seeing the bus equates to them giving up the legal analysis and making the decision because of depp supporters out there, she's making the point if jurors are so influenced by what goes on around them that they substitute their negotiations nor what they are going to decide for, oh, gosh, vote team depp, i'm so distracted, then yes, that is correct, but not what the jurors are doing. give them more credit, nancy. come on. >> john: we asked jonna which way she thought the jury would be leaning and said toward johnny depp. let me ask you this question. which way do you think the jury is leaning and in the end, were either one of these two sympathetic figures? >> ok. so, here is one thing, the only thing we know for certain. these jurors have definitely made the finding beyond all doubt these two should probably not reconcile. secondly, that's all we can agree on.
the second thing is yeah, i think they are leaning towards johnny depp, i guess, if this is like hey, i'm on team this one or team this one. but if they are following the law their question is did johnny depp prove 51% that she lied about what she wrote in the op-ed piece, not did she lie about certain things when she testified, which she may have, but did she lie about being a domestic violence victim. that's the key and you know what's interesting. everybody in the court of opinion, even those typing hate-filled emails to me right now, did not even read the washington post-op ed piece, that's interesting. read the piece and you circle what is a bold face lie which she does not deserve protection, i challenge you to do that. but it gets in the way of blaming and shaming. >> sandra: some of the aspects you cannot make up, david spunt saying johnny depp, he's waiting
this out in the u.k., he will not return for this verdict to be read and john, you brought up the video earlier, johnny depp waiting in the u.k. on stage, singing and playing guitar with jeff beck there. you know, you've got the rock and roll chops, but as you noted one of the greatest guitar players in history. i guess if you are going to try to get your mind off things, good way to do it. >> another reason why he's there. you know what i think? i think he knew going into this that his chances of prevailing were so low, so remote, they approached almost no real value and the only winners are the attorneys, assuming they are charging by the hour. if he was truly led to believe what the will you truly is, he knew his chances of proving that she lied about being a domestic violence victim, no way that they could find through some of
the things he said or did that she could consider herself a domestic violence victim, i don't believe he knew that he had a chance other than a snowball's chance in you know what. he lost in london, he knew he was not going to prevail and that's what i feel is the outcome here. >> john: come back to what you were mentioning a moment ago, and that is the op-ed in the "washington post," i did read it several times and tried to find the lie in it and it didn't necessarily jump out at me. you can take a look at it and say ok, a victim of domestic violence, it could be about johnny depp but maybe it could be about somebody else, too. there was no specific link between that statement and depp. >> yes, yes. and that's why i like you, john. one of the means reasons. you approach it, talking legally, what you did is what i'm asking people to do.
simply go line by line and you tell me when what she is saying is not protected by the constitution. it's a bold face lie and actual malice that was in her head when she wrote it. it's not there. that's why this lawsuit has no legal merit. >> john: still you are leaning toward depp in terms of what the jury will render in a verdict? >> no, they should both get nothing. they both did not prove their lawsuits. they both get nothing. court of public opinion people are leaning towards depp, why, great actor and whatever the heck they want to find. they both get nothing. >> john: is that a decision the jury could make, null and void, both of you 0 sum gain, nobody gets anything? >> yes, that's what i'm betting my kids' college fund on. of course, i don't really bet the kids' college fund, he did
not prove what she wrote was defamatory under the law. she did not prove her lawsuit either, she doesn't get 100 million or a dollar, and good-bye, people. you used us to increase your, i don't know, your view in the court of public opinion however you wanted, now good on your way. good luck to you both. >> sandra: volatile at times, that's for sure, captured the nation. i wonder about precedent, mark. >> precedent should be listen, unless you have a strong legal case don't go to battle. both sides come out bloody. there are some things i learned about johnny depp i don't want to know about one of my favorite actors of all time. i don't want to know those things and i think the only reason why he did that is because my guess is he felt that it could not get any worse so let's just give it a shot. i do not believe that he or his lawyers genuinely believed he would be able to carry his
burden of 51% and prove she does not get constitutional protection on what she wrote. >> john: do you think, mark, this trial has hurt their earning power in the future? >> not my area of expertise, but i can tell you that there is a lot on social media, seems to support johnny depp and those people would buy tickets to go and see him. maybe he has a shot of some future roles. not necessarily with the disney franchise, but maybe as a bad guy in some other movies. >> sandra: it's amazing the number of celebrities, john, mark, including chris rock, took the stage during the u.k. leg of the ego death world tour and that heard, dare i say, poop on his bed, believe all women, believe all women, except amber heard and then believing depp's
claims, what the blank is she on, she blank in his bed. she's fine but she is not this -- fine. ok. it is a write-up in page six of this moment of celebrities that have weighed in and where we are. hopefully we have the actual official verdict read shortly. mark. >> well, yeah, i'm looking forward to it and i was trying to be nice about the celebrities. last i checked, unless they had a law degree and did what john did and went through each line of the op-ed piece analytically, not emotionally, they have no credibility there. it's a legal case in a court of law. from that perspective, find out what the law is, read what it's about and rule in one party's favor or another, that is a legal decision, not necessarily because somebody liked johnny depp more or amber heard more. it's a legal, it's a law case.
>> john: all right, mark. we await this verdict. we are told some time between maybe 2:40 and 3:00. so if you could hang with us for some more context, perspective and analysis as we get more and more, as we get closer and closer to this. we would appreciate it. >> sandra: john, apparently, reportedly back stage was kate moss as johnny depp was up there with the rocker, and kate moss you'll remember said he never pushed me, kicked me or threw me down any stairs. she told the jury, she appeared as a rebuttal witness. >> john: to mark's point, maybe the jury is saying johnny depp and amber heard should never reconcile, but maybe it could bring about reconciliation of johnny depp and kate moss. who knows. >> sandra: i was being told in my ear about a mountain lion, i did not hear you, but we should probably move on.
>> john: a live look at a high school in california, students and staff got quite a scare. a mountain lion somehow getting inside the building. right now, animal control is working on getting the big cat out of the school. san mateo sheriff's office says all students and staffers are safe, no immediate threat, the mountain lion was isolated inside the classroom. maybe he wanted to take a math class. >> sandra: do we know if the school is in session there? >> john: i think so, students were there. >> sandra: just had a look there, ktvu, bringing live pictures of the school. obviously quite a story, it could be a dangerous situation if the mountain lion gets spooked. are we getting pictures, okay, the pictures are just in there. >> john: mountain lion inside a school, at a desk, where you would expect a mountain lion to
be in school. >> sandra: we hope for a peaceful and safe ending to that story. we will continue to monitor the situation there with our live camera at the school, we hope the students are safely evacuated and that mountain lion gets back to where it needs to go. we'll bring you an update on that, and caitlyn jenner is coming up. we'll have her weigh in on the verdict as we await it and also on the swimmer lia thomas, what she is saying now on that.
officers not to breach the classroom. >> sandra: the war of words between agencies doing nothing to ease the pain of the families wondering what could have been done to save their loved ones. chris swecker, it's hard to believe we still feel like we are learning new information and the information we already had was not exactly accurate. where are you on all this? >> yeah, that has been the story of this case, and i knew from day one something was off. i thought it had to do with the school resource officer's response but turned out to be much broader than that. so, what we are seeing right now is the police chief is feeling the heat, and law enforcement, when you are involved in a shooting, you can't be compelled to give a statement. and even if they, you know, they can't threaten to fire you if you don't give a statement. there's a court case called gerty versus new jersey, similar to the right against
self-incrimination. by now the relationship in the, between the d.p.s. and the police departments, both of them, uvalde and i.s.d. has deteriorated since the big press conference. but still a criminal investigation by the feds. this person, this shooter assaulted a federal officer and potentially other violations there, they have the power of the grand jury. also going to be a border patrol shooting inquiry, and then we have the justice department critical incident review, probably come out about a year from now. >> john: i saw an interview with pete arradondo and he clearly was stone walling the journalist interviewing him, but he did suggest at some point he will speak to the events of that day. it would seem to be pretty clear, chris, that battle lines are being drawn between the local police force, the school police force and the greater texas d.p.s.
you mention you don't have to make a statement if you are involved in a shooting, but he did not do shooting as far as we know. he was the incident commander and shouldn't the incident commander be held accountable? >> he should. you don't have to do the actual shooting. if you are involved in an actual shooting incident and he's in command, he's giving the orders, probably until the border patrol took over, but that all also to be sorted out. my educated guess here is he's consulted an attorney and perhaps f.o.p. attorney, they know how to deal with these situations and as you see, the battle lines have been drawn. and i think they were drawn the day my former colleague, colonel steve mccraw gave that press conference and said they made the wrong decisions. this is a state agency, they are local agencies. sometimes there is friction but i think the friction is underscored in this particular case and it could have some pretty lasting impacts.
>> sandra: chris, can i get your reaction to news just in crossing the a.p. wire at this time. a grand jury has indicted the buffalo supermarket shooting suspect on charges, including domestic terrorism as a hate crime. that just crossing now. your reaction, chris. >> well, there is no charge of domestic terrorism. i think somebody might be misinterpreting that. hate crime is a separate federal statute and it could involve an act of domestic terrorism, i suspect he's been indicted under the federal hate crime statute. so domestic terrorism involves use of weapons of mass destruction and that sort of thing. >> john: at least we do know he's facing federal charges at this point. back to uvalde, if i could. the decisions made on that day,
to not go into the school, certainly did not sit well with the border patrol vortac team who were cooling their heels outside 35 minutes before they finally said we don't care what this guy arradondo says, we are going in, try to take the shooter out and save as many lives as possible. there was a break in the chain of command which is notable in and of itself. you know, i don't want to say if you were there would you have, but the actions that the vortac team took in light of what appeared to be, according to steve mccraw, a bad decision. were they the right ones to take? >> border patrol absolutely correct to go in. you know, they -- i think they would have gone in even if they didn't have their tactical team there. i mean, and i've talked to law enforcement colleagues of mine, talked to many people and all of them say you have to go in.
when you hear over the radio 911 calls coming in, or that children are calling in from the room, this is what you signed up to do. and it is a moment of truth for law enforcement. and yes, there's a crazy kid on the other side of the door firing 223 rounds through the door you might get shot. but these are kids. it's not a bank robber barricaded in there, not a drug trafficker, not a drug case, these are 7, 8, 9, 10-year-old kids helpless calling in. you have no choice but to go in. >> sandra: go back to the buffalo supermarket for more detail, i was reading directly off the wire, a grand jury returned an indictment wednesday against the 18-year-old accused of killing ten people in a racist attack at a buffalo supermarket, a.p., gendron, in custody since may 14, since the may 14 shooting, is scheduled to
be arraigned thursday in erie county court. charges will not be disclosed until his court appearance, to calling it domestic terrorism motivated by hate. >> could be a state statute there. this is county court, so the feds have not brought their charges yet. i see, i see some, much more coming down the pike here. he will probably see some federal hate crime statutes. may be a domestic terrorism state statute i'm not aware of. >> sandra: chris, appreciate it. thank you very much. >> john: thanks, chris. funerals now underway for some of the children in last week's school massacre as one local artist is doing his part to give the parents a chance to let their kids' souls shine. casey stegall live in uvalde
with the latest on this. >> yeah, john. soul shine industries is actually the name of the company in nearby edna, texas, it's a family business, they were contacted by the texas funeral director's association on the day of the shooting and tapped to provide custom caskets for the families. after a georgia company purchased the goods, then shipped them to texas where soul shine artists got to work, meeting with each family member, learning about their loved ones and customizing every casket with unique designs and themes, all hand painted and all free for the victims. one less thing for them to worry about. frankly, in a community that has been paralyzed by grief in the last week. >> she says i've been shot, and i didn't want to say anything because i did not want him to come over and shoot me, so i sat
quiet and he came back and shot her again because she would not be quiet. >> the stories will still pull at our heart strings long after this is over. each casket cost roughly 34 to $3,800, but one of the local funeral homes picked up the tab for all of the services. it will take about two and a half weeks to bury all of the victims. john. >> john: it's just heartbreaking to think of what they are going through down there and when you hear from that little girl, chloe, about what she went through, that is a scar that will never heal. casey, thank you for bringing -- unbelievable. casey, thanks for bringing that to us, appreciate it. >> sure. >> john: sandra, pretty extraordinary what the artists are doing with the caskets.
>> sandra: anything to help the community still grieving and john, making it more difficult for the families, so many unanswered questions of the investigation still as we have been reporting. >> john: heart just breaks every time you think about it. we are on verdict watch in the johnny depp/amber heard trial. we hope to have that verdict some time in the next 19 minutes or so. also ahead, caitlyn jenner weighs in thinking about becoming an olympic swimmer. that's coming up next. she's getting graded on her green investments with merrill. a-plus. still got it. (whistle blows) your money never stops working for you with merrill, a bank of america company. welcome to the next level. your money never stops working for you with merrill, this is the lexus nx with intuitive tech... (beeps) car: watch for traffic ...and our most advanced safety system ever. ♪ ♪ i brought in ensure max protein,
with thirty grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks! (sighs wearily) here i'll take that! (excited yell) woo-hoo! ensure max protein. with thirty grams of protein, one gram of sugar, and nutrients to support immune health. i had been giving koli kibble. it never looked like real food. with the farmer's dog you can see the pieces of turkey. it smells like actual food. as he's aged, he's still quite energetic and youthful. i really attribute that to diet. get started at longlivedogs.com your record label is taking off. but so is your sound engineer. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire
time. it's life's most precious commodity, especially when you have metastatic breast cancer. when your time is threatened, it's hard to invest in your future. until now. kisqali is helping women live longer than ever before when taken with an aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant... in hr+, her2- metastatic breast cancer. kisqali is a pill that's proven to delay disease progression. kisqali can cause lung problems, or an abnormal heartbeat, which can lead to death. it can cause serious skin reactions, liver problems, and low white blood cell counts that may result in severe infections.
tell your doctor right away if you have new or worsening symptoms, including breathing problems, cough, chest pain... a change in your heartbeat, dizziness, yellowing of the skin or eyes, dark urine, tiredness, loss of appetite, abdomen pain, bleeding, bruising, fever, chills, or other symptoms of an infection, a severe or worsening rash, are or plan to become pregnant, or breastfeeding. avoid grapefruit during treatment. your future is ahead of you, so it's time to make the most of it with kisqali. because when you invest in yourself, everyone gets the best of you. the choice for attorney general is clear. democrat rob bonta has a passion for justice and standing up for our rights.
bonta is laser focused on protecting the right to vote and defending obamacare. but what's republican eric early's passion? early wants to bring trump-style investigations on election fraud to california, and early says he'll end obamacare and guard against the growing socialist communist threat. eric early. too extreme, too conservative
the courtroom in fair fox county, virginia -- the verdict will be read in the next 13 minutes or so, roughly scheduled for 3:00 this afternoon. johnny depp's defamation suit against her for an op-ed she wrote in the "washington post" a number of years ago claiming she had been a victim of domestic violence. she has counter sued him for $100 million, we will soon find out if the jury has decided in his favor, in her favor, or in favor of neither. mark meredith has been watching all the action with the trial over the last few weeks and he joins us now.
any idea what we can expect, mark? >> john, we know she arrived at the courthouse at 2:39, she went through the back with a small entourage, arrived in a pickup truck with 3 or 4 people. but we have seen more of johnny depp's fans outside, posters, people bringing their dogs, somewhat of a spectacle. but he's still in the u.k. and legal team says he's going to watch remotely. you can see the spans on the left of the entrance there, you can see also the media, the barricade and what's been set up a little microphone stand for, and we did receive a statement from a spokesperson for amber heard, she was criticizing him, your presence shows where your priorities are. johnny depp plays guitar in the u.s. while amber heard waits.
and taking the lack on tour. we are expecting the verdict to be read at the top of the hour. looks like plenty of people are packed in there. again, notable that johnny depp is not there, you see his main legal team there on the right-hand side of the screen and possible they could give us a comment depending what the verdict is. >> sandra: mark, i did see it reported a couple places, but i'm not sure. is there any idea if we'll see johnny depp pop up on a zoom or anything? >> i do not know that. that would be -- that would be interesting to know, i'm sorry, sandra, i don't know that off the top of my head. i would be curious to see what the immediate reaction is going to be. obviously you see the legal team, but amber heard saying this is showing you where your priorities are, taking a snickering and lack of
seriousness on tour, and performing with johnny depp and jeff back, and saying because of work purposes johnny depp will not be in the courthouse today but we are seeing the depp fans show up. look like amber heard is speaking with her legal team, likely killing time like the rest of us waiting to find out what the jury is going to ultimately say. >> john: and mark, make sure we get the order correct. johnny depp was performing with jeff beck, the man, the myth. >> why you are the expert. >> john: i'm older than you are, i remember when he was with the yardbirds in the 1960s. >> sandra: often called the guitarist's guitarist, john, that is correct? >> john: absolutely. there was a time when jeff beck, jimmy page and eric clapton were all in the yardbirds. can you imagine? >> sandra: on the cover of
"rolling stone" three times, so london, five hours ahead, he could be on the stage when the verdict is read. who knows. bob, thank you for joining us. here we have it, everybody knows, we have set it up for quite some time now, and why don't you give us your expectation. >> it's real hard, sandra, this case i've said from the very beginning from covering it, you have to look at the fact there is a legal issue and a legal case and then the court of public opinion. so, two different courts going on here, and from the moment that johnny depp stepped into the courtroom, it is very clear as amplified on social media, not that this has anything to do with the law, that he already won. achieved a victory. so sometimes as a lawyer you advise clients, the repercussions, the court of public opinion, especially if you are a high profile figure. do you want to go through with this. but johnny depp said for six years i've had to remain silent
and not tell my story and clearly he's thinking the court of public opinion and the vast majority of tweets and things you see, could be good for resurrecting his career. even testified he won because he was able to walk in the courtroom. victory in my mind for johnny depp. and the second is a legal one. defamation cases are extremely difficult to prove, especially against a public figure. if the jury believes in any way, shape or form she was a victim of domestic abuse, we know they had a nasty relationship, very dysfunctional, he's going to lose his case in the court of law. that said, as a trial lawyer, i won't make predictions what's going on here, they have been deliberating for 12 hours and 45 minutes after a copious amount of witnesses and testimony and
documents and exhibits. as a trial lawyer, that tells me they were firmly convinced. >> john: we'll find out what the jury decided moments from now. bob, thank you so much. caitlyn jenner, fox news contributor. we want to talk about lia thomas, but first of all, any thoughts about the pending verdict here? >> caitlyn: i'm excited to see what it is. this has been a long, drawn out trial and dying to see what the verdict is. honestly, i don't know how it's going to come out. >> sandra: have you ever met either of them? >> caitlyn: i've never met her. johnny depp one time at an event crossing paths but i don't know either of them. >> john: we are all anxiously awaiting the verdict. all right, swing to lia thomas who said in an interview with abc the other day that maybe just maybe she wants to try for the women's olympic team in
swimming, insisting that male transathletes are not a threat to women's sports. in 2015 you seemed to agree with that point. play what you said at that time what you were accepting the arthur ashe courage, we don't have it apparently. i said to acknowledge all the young transathletes out there given the chance to play sports as who they really are. so, back then in 2015, accepting the arthur ashe courage award you appeared to support this idea. you have changed your mind since then. what led to that change? >> it's not so much changed my mind, i've just looked at it so much more closely since then. first of all, lia thomas is not at fault for this whole issue. right now we are living in this woke world that allows her to compete against, and win medals against biological women. lia thomas played by the rules,
i have no problem with her. but what i've been urging from the beginning is that the ncaa change their policies to protect women in sports. to be honest with you, i'm talking about one issue, which is lia thomas. because it isn't fair. i'm glad she's happy, you know, she, in this woke world, where did she go to do her first interview is abc, the woke network, and she was thrown a lot of softball questions. she did a good job with it and she was probably very smart to go there, but there are so many questions out there about this. you know, she said after she started her transition how happy she became, hey, i get that. i know how it is, i've been through the entire process from day one, and i am, you know, authentically a woman now. and i know the effects of that, and that she's so happy. and i'm glad she's happy.
but in doing what she's doing, which the ncaa has allowed, has allowed, i am sure there's a lot of people out there that are not happy. you know, pan, and the athletes had to keep their mouth shut, play the woke thing and keep their mouth shut. but i don't think the girl that just missed out by one place going to the ncaa is a happy athlete. when you transition, you have to have some integrity, and i think in some cases that may be lacking here, but she did play by the rules. >> sandra: caitlyn, good to have you here, sandra. you referenced this morning in an interview on this network dr. michael joiner's comments on things you just can't change and more specifically weighing in on the amount of time for the hormone therapy to actually effectively take its course, and i wanted to play that exchange
and tell us what your thoughts were on it. listen. >> obviously issues related to body size, airway size, hand size, foot size, perhaps bone density and so forth. but i think the main thing is the interactions of exercise training and skeletal muscle. >> are you saying that years of hormone therapy cannot put trans women in their place to compete with cisgender with 'em? >> i think evidence so far would suggest that periods of a year, two years, three years, four years, is probably insufficient. >> you know, you made the case the onous is not on lia thomas but on the ncaa for this, and appropriate changes should be fall. where do you fall, what woodwork? >> caitlyn: i don't know what the answer is, it's a very complicated question. but obviously the ncaa, it's not working. i agree with that doctor 100%, i've been through the process. i can still, seven years later still hit the ball 280, 290
yards in playing golf. i've got a lot left over and lia thomas has a lot left over. good example, let's say the nba, ok, takes on the rules of the ncaa and you have to be on hormone replaced for one year. michael jordan decides to come back to play, you know, basketball and he all of a sudden says he's trans. and so he gets on hormones for, hormone replacement for one year. comes back, plays in the wnba, how do you think michael jordan would do in a case like that. here's the thing. i talk about this one issue, and that is lia thomas. but the transathlete issue is so much bigger, ok. there are so many young people out here, out there that i'd --
identify trans at a very young age and truly trans, and wonderful parents, do all the medical things right. of course they should be able to play in sports. sports is good, that's a good thing. you know, what we are talking about here today is a totally different issue. a male that went through male puberty, if you see him on the starting line, you know, he's so big, so tall, his reach -- her now, so big, so tall, and the girl standing next to her look up to that and my god, i don't have a chance against this, i'm going for second place. two different issues. trans issue is very complicated. >> john: and you can see that when you see pictures of lia thomas next to members of the swim team or the competitors as well. quite a large physical difference between them. caitlyn, always great to get your thoughts on this stuff. appreciate you coming in today. >> caitlyn: always my pleasure. off to the johnny depp verdict.
>> sandra: and who are you siding with, anyone? >> caitlyn: yeah, no, i actually have been following it. it's very interesting. >> sandra: we are all watching it. >> john: great to spend time with you at the correspondent's dinner, too. >> sandra: thanks for being with us. i'm sandra smith. >> john: john roberts. martha, take it away. >> martha: hello. i'm martha maccallum live in london for the platinum jubilee of queen elizabeth ii. the story that is clearly breaking right now is happening in fairfax county, virginia. in a courtroom that has been watched very widely over the course of the past several weeks. let's go straight to the courtroom as we wait for the verdict as we expect it to come in any moment. let's l
Uploaded by TV Archive on