THE VERY FABRIC OF OUR COUNTRY. >> AND DOES IT HURT THE REPUTATION OF THE SUPREME COURT A SECOND TIME IN OUR GENERATIONS AT LEAST SINCE, YOU KNOW, 2000, STEPPING INTO THE MIDDLE OF A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN A DECISIVE WAY POTENTIALLY? >> THAT PUT IT IS MILDLY, ANDREA. IN 2000 REPRESENTING AL GORE AND THE SUPREME COURT, I OBVIOUSLY DIDN'T THINK THE COURT DID THE RIGHT THING. IT AT LEAST WAS UNDERSTANDING WHAT IT WAS DOING THERE. IT WAS RESOLVING A LIVE DISPUTE OVER THE ELECTORAL VOTES OF FLORIDA, AND IT WAS DECIDING THAT THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT REALLY HAD MESSED UP IN THE WAY IT WAS RECOUNTING THE VOTES. IN THIS CASE THE SUPREME COURT INJECTED ITSELF UNNECESSARILY ESSENTIALLY IN ORDER TO GO ALONG WITH THE EFFORTS OF DONALD TRUMP NOT EVER TO BE TRIED. BECAUSE IF HE WINS THE NEXT ELECTION, YOU CAN BE ABSOLUTELY SURE THAT HE'LL PICK AN ATTORNEY GENERAL WHO WILL DO HIS BIDDING, DISMISS THESE CHARGES. AND SO THIS IS WAY WORSE AND I THINK WILL HURT THE SUPREME COURT EVEN MORE THAN BUSH V. GORE, AND THAT'S TERRIBLE BECAUSE WE NEED A SUPREME COURT THAT CAN HELP HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE UNDER THE LAW. SO WE REALLY ARE IN A TERRIBLE SITUATION IN WHICH ALL THAT CAN BE DONE IS FOR THE VOTERS TO DECIDE EN MASSE THAT WE HAVE TO STOP THIS DEVASTATION OF OUR SYSTEM OF LAWS AND JUSTICE BY VOTING AGAINST DONALD TRUMP AND BY VOTING IN A DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS, AND JOE BIDEN, EVEN IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH HIS POLICIES, AT LEAST HE DOESN'T PLAN TO BE A DICTATOR. >> PROFESSOR LAURENCE TRIBE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING WITH US. >> THANK YOU, ANDREA. >>> AND JOYCE VANCE IS STILL WITH ME, A PROFESSOR IN HER OWN RIGHT. WHAT DO YOU THINK? >> SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE SUPREME COURT ARGUMENT THAT WE HEARD YESTERDAY MORNING, THERE WAS GOOD REASON TO BE DISTURBED BY IT, AS PROFESSOR TRIBE POINTS OUT, BUT THE REALITY IS THAT THE ARGUMENT IS NOT THE FINAL DECISION. WE'LL WAIT ON THAT AND THE QUESTION IS HOW LONG WILL WE WAIT FOR IT. WILL THIS COURT ACT QUICKLY, OR WILL IT WAIT FOR THE END OF THE TERM AND AS PROFESSOR TRIBE SAYS GIVE DONALD TRUMP HIS DELAY GAME. >> THEY WAIT UNTIL THE END OF THE TERM, THAT'S JUNE, JULY, ARGUABLY THE FIRST WEEK OF JULY MOST LIKELY. BY THE TIME THEY GET TO THE DISTRICT COURT AND HEARINGS BEFORE JUDGE CHUTKAN, SHE SAID SHE NEEDS 81 DAYS. SHE DOESN'T NEED ALL OF THAT TIME. I KNOW YOU WERE SUGGESTING YESTERDAY AS WAS ANDREW WEISSMANN THAT SHE COULD HOLD HEARINGS THAT WOULD BE EXPOSITORY, THAT WOULD PUT ALL OF THIS EVIDENCE OUT IN FROCHBT FRONT OF THE PUBLIC, BUT THAT'S NOT THE SAME AS A CONVICTION. >> IT DEPENDS ON THE FORM THE SUPREME COURT TAKES AND WHAT THEY DIRECT HER TO DO NEXT. IF THEY TELL HER TO DECIDE WHAT OF THE CONDUCT IN THE INDICTMENT IS OFFICIAL AND WHAT'S PRIVATE, SHE MAY WELL HOLD HEARINGS. IT COULD SERVE TO GET EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. >> AS FAR AS THIS TRIAL IS PROGRESSING, WE TALKED YESTERDAY ABOUT HOW IT'S MOVING QUICKLY, SO DAVID PECKER WILL PROBABLY WRAP UP MAYBE EVEN BEFORE THE LUNCH BREAK, AND THEN THEY MOVE ON TO THE NEXT WITNESSES. WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHO. COULD BE HOPE HICKS. COULD CONTINUE ON THIS THREAD AS TO WHAT WAS HAPPENING, YOU KNOW, TO SET UP MORE RELIABLE EVIDENCE, IF YOU WILL, BEFORE THEY HAVE TO DEAL WITH MICHAEL COHEN. >> HOPE HICKS IS SUCH AN INTERESTING WITNESS HERE. WE KNOW SHE WAS IN AND OUT OF THIS MEETING THAT DAVID PECKER HAS TESTIFIED TO. WE DON'T KNOW IF SHE'S JUST CONFIRM THE DETAILS THAT IT TOOK PLACE, OR IF SHE OVERHEARD ANYTHING OR PERHAPS TALKED WITH DONALD TRUMP AFTERWARDS. IT COULD BE VERY INTERESTING AND IMPORTANT TESTIMONY FOR THE PROSECUTION. >> SHE WAS THERE ON THE SCENE. SHE COULD BE THE CASSIDY HUTCHINSON OF THIS IN TERMS OF SOMEONE WHO WAS AN AIDE AND A SMART WOMAN AND LISTENING TO EVERYTHING, AN EYE WITNESS. >> SHE HAS ALWAYS STAYED CLOSE TO DONALD TRUMP, AND ONE THING YOU LEARN AS A PROSECUTOR IS NOT TO EXPECT PEOPLE TO CHANGE THEIR STRIPES, BUT SOMETIMES PEOPLE DO, EITHER BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THAT THEY PERSONALLY FACE SOME RISK IF THEY DON'T COOPERATE WITH PROSECUTORS OR BECAUSE THEY'VE HAD A CHANGE OF HEART AND HAVE DECIDED TO DO THE RIGHT THING IN THE CLUTCH. WE DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT FROM HER, ANDREA. >> AND IN COURT RIGHT NOW, STEINGLASS IS STILL REDIRECTING TO DAVID PECKER IN THAT MEETING, DID YOU EVER SPECIFICALLY USE THE TERM CATCH AND KILL? AND HE'S SAYING, NO, I DID NOT. IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING I WOULD BE THE SOURCE OF ANY INFORMATION COMING OUT ON MR. TRUMP OR HIS CAMPAIGN RELATED SPECIFICALLY TO WOMEN SELLING THOSE STORIES SIMILAR TO WHAT I EXPERIENCED WITH ARNOLD. SPEAKING OF SCHWARZENEGGER, 13 YEARS AGO AND THOSE IF OTHER STORIES COME UP. I WILL SPEAK TO MICHAEL COHEN AND TELL HIM THAT THEY WILL BE FOR SALE, AND IF YOU DON'T BUY THEM SOMEONE ELSE WILL. THIS WAS BASICALLY TRANSACTION. >> IT WAS. AND IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT LABEL IT BEARS BECAUSE WHAT PECKER HAS JUST DONE IS HE HAS DESCRIBED HOW CATCH AND KILL WORKS. >> AND THIS IS A SIDE OF JOURNALISM THAT A LOT OF US ARE NOT VERY FAMILIAR WITH. WE SEE THE HEADLINES AND A LOT OF US DISCOUNT IT BECAUSE SO MUCH OF IT IS FAKE AND YOU SORT OF KNOW THAT GOING IN, BUT THE REACH OF THESE SUPERMARKET, YOU KNOW, HEADLINES, I MEAN, THEY'RE IN EVERY STORE AS PEOPLE WERE BUYING THEIR FOOD. PEOPLE DON'T READ THE STORIES SO MUCH AS SEE THE COVERS. >> IT'S AN INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT VEHICLE FOR INFORMATION, RIGHT? I REMEMBER THIS ONE GREAT HEADLINE FROM WHEN I WAS IN LAW SCHOOL AT THE COUNTER THAT SAID ONE THIRD OF ALL AMERICAN PETS ARE SPACE ALIENS, AND OF COURSE YOU KNOW THAT'S MADE UP, BUT AS YOU READ THE HEADLINES FOR POLITICIANS, FOR SOME PEOPLE THAT'S A PRIMARY SOURCE OF NEWS.
