joining this now with reaction, attorney for president trump and fox news legal analyst, gregg jarrett. greg, someone noted online earlier, it might have been mccarthy, i'm not sure. but the defenses argument to the jury at the end was this doesn't count as a live because the people he was battling it to a new it was alive. lies don't count if you figure it out. isn't that right? give us an idea of what we can expect from this point forward from that particular jury and what they might come back with. >> a lie is not a lie of the recipient is of a lie realizes. that is the most cockamamie explanation are rationalization for a lie that i've ever heard. and that was basically the endemic of the entire argument for the defense. oh, this is a fine, her noble man sitting here accused, he is innocent. these were just blanket denials. at one point in time, he contradicted himself. he incriminated his own client by saying first, he really wasn't representing hillary clinton during that fbi meeting and then in the next breath, he said, but because the fbi figured out he was representing hillary

anyway, here with reaction, fox news contributor leo 2.0 terrell, fox news legal analyst gregg jarrett. leo, i'm going to start with you, you know i trained and mixed martial arts, i do a lot of situational self-defense preparation for moments like what we've seen with chris rock or in this case dave chappelle, i think two of the funniest comedians out there. for example, i have said to people, they think hannity doesn't know what the hell he is talking about when it comes to martial arts. at close range, if i'm dealing with a gun, that is pointed at me right here, where i can go like this and strip it, literally break the guys finger, strip the gun, step back, i would rather do that. if someone pointed at my forehead, okay, i will duck, i will push it up, jammed it back, break his finger, and jam it into them. then i will strip it, step back, tap it, racquet, do four over three there. someone put a gun in my back, i will get -- something we do regularly. a knife to me in the hands of somebody," are fighting come only talking about" or, not distance, i would rather deal with a firearm

here with reaction, fox news legal analyst, gregg jarrett, along with trump attorney. you were in the courtroom again today. tell us the latest. >> yes, i had my team in the courtroom today, and we will be there all week, as i've told you, sean, so today was a big day. we have bill priestap, he spoke, cooking refreshes recollection even when he saw his nose, he had no memory, it was very interesting. within iran gaynor and allison sanz testified today. the biggest things that we got out of today's testimony was that there was a close hold on sussman, which on the fbi means they hid the source of the information and that was highly convenient considering that michael sussman was retained by the dnc and hillary clinton for america campaign. we then heard, as you mentioned, that the department of justice was mentioned as the source for the white papers, which are the falsified documents by the company new star. by michael sussman. and we learned a little bit more today about how those were doctored and then funneled up and it's a really sad day i think for the fbi and to

with reaction to the big election results that are breaking, fox news legal analyst gregg jarrett along with cohost of "the five," geraldo rivera. it is interesting, geraldo, you poll people, this has been done many times, how do you feel about negative ads? people say oh, we hate negative ads, but the truth is, negative ads work, whether they are truthful, not truthful, doesn't matter, and in this race, i think in many ways, the primary with republicans has been defined by tens and tens of millions of dollars in negative ads, and i would argue dave mccormick is in a good fight with oz, right now it is a two-point race, in large part, they spend a ton of money and pounded oz with 40 plus million dollars worth of negative ads. >> that is why, sean, i think i agree with you, i want dr. oz to win. he is a friend of mine, a wonderful person, he was in the talk show business as i was, obviously, he is a good guy, good-hearted person, born in cleveland, i like dave mccormick, also, until those ads. he is a winner -- awarded the bronze star, the real deal, heads fund -- >> sean: incredible sto

trump attorney and gregg jarrett will break us down for us, stay right there. cal: our confident forever plan is possible with a cfp® professional. a cfp® professional can help you build a complete financial plan. visit letsmakeaplan.org to find your cfp® professional. ♪♪ getting guns off our streets. one democrat's determined to get it done. attorney general rob bonta knows safer streets start with smarter gun control. and bonta says we must ban assault weapons. but eric early, a trump republican who goes too far defending the nra and would loosen laws on ammunition and gun sales. because for him, protecting the second amendment is everything. eric early. too extreme, too conservative for california. fanduel and draftkings, too conservative two out of state corporations making big promises to californians. what's the real math behind their ballot measure for online sports betting? 90% of profits go to the out of state corporations permanently. only eight and a half cents is left for the homeless. and in virginia, arizona, and other states, fanduel and d

jarrett. we will begin with you tonight. i want to stay a little bit focused on -- we have not confirmed this. this is a politico report. the writing, what you think of it, what you read into it, draft are sent around many, many times in the process of forming a final opinion before it's released, usually in june, and i guess my main question to you is does this seem legitimate to you? does this sound alitoesque to you? do believe that this is likely where the decision goes and what would be the ramifications for people? because i know it will be demagogued and meanwhile it only would mean that the states would decide, not the federal government. >> well, it is a rough draft, so it is not as let's say elegant in its pros as the final draft would be. and i'm skeptical too along with you. for example, let me just read one portion of this alleged draft opinion. roe was egregiously wrong from the start, it's reasoning was exceptionally weak, the decision has had damaging circumstance -- consequenc

. >> sean: gregg jarrett, jury selection is one aspect. durham has been very slow getting to the bottom of it. they said this was a conspiracy to bring out an october surprise to help hillary clinton win and lie to the american people and that the fbi knew early -- that's what i took out of that greg. that raises the question why did the head of the fbi sign the first 3 fisa warrants. >> there is no question in my mind james comey lied to the fisa court. that's a crime. he should have been held in contempt of court by the fisa judges, but he wasn't. another example of unequal justice under the law. what i worry about in this case, because baker is the star witness against sussman and blew a hole in the dense. -- defense. he has no dense but can still get an acquittal? how, because it's washington, d.c. where the voters are democrats. 92% voted for joe biden and 5% cast ballots for donald trump. the jurors are all hillary clinton supporters and even donors and loathe donald trump which why the dense asked the judge to tell the jury, the def