D4vd Faces Major Decision Before Explosive Murder Trial

Will David take the stand? What would. that even look like? What would he be. asked? How would he explain [music] half. of the things that he's accused of in. this bombshell murder case? I'm bringing. on a criminal defense attorney to break. all of that down. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law & Crime. >> [music]. >> I'm Jesse Weber. Will David [music] take the stand in his. own trial? It's a big question. And at. first I should tell you. if we even get to a trial, right? We. haven't even had the preliminary hearing.

yet to see if there's enough evidence. for this case to move forward toward. trial. That's now scheduled for the end. of June. But assuming the charges stick. and assuming there's no plea deal and. this goes to trial will he testify? What. would he say? I mean, there appears to. be a lot for him to address and I want. to go through it because what would his. possible explanations be assuming all. the evidence that the prosecution claims. they have that they present? There are a. lot of layers to this as we think about. it and there is a lot at stake for him.

David, real name David Anthony Burke, [clears throat] facing charges of. first-degree murder, continuous sexual. abuse of a child under 14, unlawful. mutilation of human remains, all in. connection with the death of 14-year-old. Celeste Davis Hernandez, whose. decomposed, dismembered body was. reportedly found in a Tesla out in LA. back on September 8th of last year. Allegedly a Tesla registered to David. out in Texas. And remember, prosecutors. have alleged special circumstances here, right? To get to life in prison without.

the possibility of parole, to get. possibly the death penalty. So, they. have alleged murder of a witness, murder. for financial gain, lying in wait. They've alleged use of a deadly and. dangerous weapon, sharp instrument. The. ME's office concluded that Celeste's. cause of death was multiple penetrating. injuries. Prosecutors have alleged that. David murdered Celeste to keep her. quiet. That they were in an alleged. illegal sexual relationship, her being a. minor. That she was allegedly going to. expose him, that she was allegedly going.

to ruin his financially lucrative. career, and that he allegedly murdered. her. And prosecutors claim that on April. 23rd, 2025, he allegedly lured Celeste. to his home, stabbed her repeatedly, watched her bleed out, and then. allegedly proceeded to order supplies. online to engage in the dismemberment of. her body and cover up of the alleged. crime. Chainsaws, body bag, laundry. bags, inflatable pool. Prosecutors have. claimed a combination of surveillance. footage, cellular data, DNA evidence, witness testimony, all purportedly tie. David to these crimes. And we're going.

to get to that. But, is he going to take. the stand? And if he did, how does he. explain all of that? How does he address. all of that? How would he do under. cross-examination by the prosecution, by. Beth Silverman? We did a whole episode. on her as a prosecutor. She's called at. one point the sniper because she had at. one point never lost a murder case. This. is what I want to talk about. All right, so now it is time to bring on John Day, criminal defense attorney, all the way. from the West Coast. Comes here. Thank. you very much. Glad we got the memo to.

dress the same. This is good taste. I. like it. Um look, let's start here. It's. always the defendant's right to take the. stand. It's the defendant's choice. What. are those conversations like? So, in. this case, the defendant would have to. have an incredibly good explanation as. to why the prosecution says he ordered a. body bag online, Yeah. uh a plastic. pool, chainsaws. Oh, we'll get to all. that. I I think like generally speaking, like what is that conversation. >> is.

the defendant has the right to make the. call. If he tells his lawyers, "I'm. going to testify," then his lawyers have. to respect his wishes. There's a lot of. discussion that leads up to that. Uh but. the defendant has to understand what the. consequences are, that he's subject to. cross-examination by some really good. prosecutors, that if his story falls. apart anywhere along the line, the jury. is going to notice that. Um so, it's a. it's a tough conversation to have with. your client if you're a defense lawyer. You've got to explain all the pitfalls, all the problems, all the things that. could happen.

Um, and in very rare instances, yes, it. makes sense for a defendant to take the. stand in a self-defense case. A case. like this, uh, it's not going to happen. Let me ask you this. Um, well, we just. don't know. We don't know. I mean, you. know, a. criminal defendant could say, "I think I'm the best one to tell the. story." Did they do practice? Like would. you do rehearsals with them? Practice? Mock cross-examination? >> would run, uh, lots and lots of mock. crosses. You would want your client to. be prepared for all the bad things that. the prosecution is going to bring up. You want your client to understand.

what's at stake here. And if your. client, uh, you know, people say, "Well, what should I say when I'm on the. stand?" And I tell them, "Well, tell the. truth cuz it's the easiest thing to. remember." So, you've got to be able to. make sure your client has an ability to. tell the truth, look the jurors in the. eye, and say, "This is what happened. This is really what happened." And. understanding that they're going to be. subject to withering cross-examination. by the prosecutor. >> How do they come off genuine, though? Cuz it's a very, I mean, it's very. high-stakes. They're trying to appeal to. the jury. Sometimes you look at people,

it looks like a manufactured answer. And. I do wonder what's the balance there, cuz if you're prepping them, how do they. not come off looking scripted? Well, that's one of the problems. And if your. client is, say, someone who's in the. entertainment business, someone who's an. actor, someone who's on stage, that's a. that's a problem. That's going to be an. issue that you've got to deal with. because a juror is going to say, "This. person is used to putting on a persona. This person is used to performing." And. so if you're the lawyer, you've got to. be able to control that and make sure. that the image that the actual defendant. who's coming across on the stand is. believable. Now, I I have to imagine if.

he were to take the stand, he would be. cross-examined by the lead prosecutor in. this case, uh, Beth Silverman. I did a. whole sidebar episode on her. She's. called the sniper at one point. That's. how good she is. Would you study her. tapes? Would you study how she's. cross-examined witnesses in the past? >> would. >> every It's like looking at game tapes in. a That's. >> a real thing though, right? >> It is a real thing. You want to know. what her style is, you want to know how. she approaches that. And you know, if. you're a prosecutor, that's what you. live for is the ability to cross-examine. a defendant on the stand. That is the.

best part of your job if that ever. happens. It doesn't happen very often, but I would look at every single case. that you can find where there's video, audio, something to show how this. prosecutor prepares and how this. prosecutor delivers. Now, we'll get into. the substance of what he's going to make. what he would testify to. and what that would look like. But. generally speaking, young guy, celebrity, big following. Haven't heard. him a ton like I you know, I guess in. interviews and things like that. How. does that affect him? Like how does that. affect how he's viewed, how he's.

analyzed on the stand? How do you think. a jury might look at that? Well, it's a. problem going into it because the jury. is going to have some sense that this. person is a celebrity, it's some sense. that this person has a public persona. So it's different than having an. ordinary defendant off the street who. doesn't have a backstory of being able. to present a side of themselves to the. public. It's going to be a disadvantage. out of the gate, but if you're skillful. as a defense lawyer and your your. defendant is is able to understand. what's at stake, you can sometimes work. it so that their public persona is not.

necessarily the real person that you see. on the stand. It's very hard to do that, but if they. he would go into this thing with a. disadvantage right at the start. Because. remember where he would testify in the. course of the trial. The the jury would. hear all the prosecution's evidence. And. I'll save this idea about when they. might call him to testify, but again, he's has to address everything the. prosecution presented. You said before. this is not like the typical case where. a defendant would take the stand. It's. not a self-defense case. Why is this not. the typical case that a defendant would.

take the stand? >> Well, for example, in a self-defense. case, the defendant has to say, "I did. what I did for this reason. My life was. in danger. I felt like I was going to. get hurt." Jury needs to understand. that. >> Right, the jury has to understand what. led up to that. A case like this, you're. simply explain trying to explain away. the all the facts that the jury has. heard from the prosecution uh and the. defense case in chief if if if they've. gone and had something presented before. the defendant testifies. But, they've. got to have a really good explanation. that addresses every single fact that.

the prosecution put put out already. I. think I have a potential idea, maybe. totally crazy. Kind of something what. we're talking about, just keep that to. the side for a second. We'll talk about. it. One more side note, the reason this. came up is cuz I'm thinking about the. Alec Murdoch case. But, whatever a. criminal defendant says on the stand, if. they take the stand, that can. potentially be used against them in a. retrial. Like, I'm wondering, Murdoch. took the stand in his first trial, can. it come in in the second trial? So, here, if David were to take the stand.

and he gets, let's say, convicted and. then whatever it's overturned, by the. law, the whatever they say on the stand can. be used against them in some way, come. into evidence in the second trial? Can. be used against them. It's a statement. under oath. They're sitting on the. witness stand, they're sworn in. So, everything they say in a first trial, they better make sure that it matches. any testimony they give in a second. trial. That's why, generally, you don't. want your defendant, your client, giving. multiple statements in a case because. it's got to be absolutely consistent, or. else the jury is going to understand. there's a problem. >> We're about to get into all this, but is.

it only used in the second trial if that. person decides to take the stand again, or can it be used in the prosecution's. case in chief? It can be used in the. prosecution's case in chief cuz it's. already a statement that they've made. under oath. So, you can impeach your if. your defendant takes the stand and he. said something that's different, you. impeach him again. This is a. prosecutor's dream. Right, but you you. could you play the prior testimony from. the first trial for the jury and use it. in like an opening statement? >> You would play the prior testimony, you'd have if the if there were cameras. in the courtroom, you'd play the video. If you'd have something that's a.

statement by the defendant, and it. that's why it's so important to be. consistent, obviously. Let's get into. the substance here. My first question is. what is he going to say? How would he. explain if he took the stand his alleged. relationship with Celeste? So, I want to. go into this. From the evidence list, from the prosecution's pre-trial brief, it says, quote, "The description of. photographs depicting the victim naked. as well as while she was engaged with. defendant in sexual activity when she. was 13. As this evidence constitutes. child sexual abuse material, the. photographs themselves will not be.

presented. While all possible charges. that could be proven were not filed, the. C Sam is proof of their ongoing sexual. relationship while the victim was 13 and. 14 years old. Numerous text messages. between defendant and the victim. evidencing their sexual relationship, pregnancy, abortion, use of Plan B. emergency contraception. Messages. through March 2025 prove defendant. continued to manipulate the victim as. she messaged, "All we do is have sex and. just hang out, man. I want more than. that for myself." These messages were. obtained from defendant's iCloud data.

This is not a case where he can say, "Oh, it was, you know, consensual." How. does he explain that? How does he. explain it? Right. California age of. consent is 18. So, here's evidence from. the prosecution that this relationship, the sexual relationship, began when she. was 13 and he was 18. >> That's the allegation, yeah. >> That's the allegation from the. prosecution. So, if you're the. defendant, you've got that to explain. You've got to explain why there was a. relationship, how it started, what the. context was. I mean, none of that, if. he's taking the stand, is going to be.

easy for a criminal defense. >> deny it? Does he say, "Hey, listen, this. is not true. You can't believe what. Celeste wrote." Kind of did an episode. on defenses like, "I'm not in this. photo, you know, I There's somebody sent. me this photo." I mean, or does he have. to. admit this part of the case? Again, that's the question. How fine a. a point do you cut at that point? Because if there's evidence that. yeah, he was engaged in that, that's. more specific than that. I mean, he can. certainly say, "Well, I'm not in the. photos. I'm not This was simply.

discussion. There was no actual you. know, there's no eyewitnesses. There's. nothing else to show to back up any kind. of illicit relationship between the two. people when they were those ages. But. that's a tough one because the if the. idea is planted in the jury's mind, it's. going to be very, very hard to get that. out of there. I think it's like this. more than even, and we'll get into it, the murder and the alleged murder and. the alleged cover-up that really is. tough to explain. I mean, I also I want. to know, I did a whole episode on. whether or not, given this potential, this alleged digital evidence, could he.

be facing federal charges? Federal. charges regarding possession of child. sexual abuse material. I even speculated. at one point, could he be looking at a. federal sex trafficking charge if you're. you're talking about a minor and, you. know, taking her on these trips and. there's a travel component. So, do you. think whatever he says, if he were to. take the stand, could be used against. him in a federal case? Yeah, I mean, there are potential federal charges. here. There's evidence that there was. transportation across the state line for. sex with a minor, things like that. Not. only that, but also the digital images.

of the minor, if that's what there is. So, yeah, anything he says on the stand. in a state murder case could certainly. be used against him in any kind of. federal prosecution that takes place. after that. Now, I am jumping around a. bit, but I think that this could be very. tough for him to explain as well. And. this goes to the mutilation and murder. charge. So, after they claim, prosecutors claim that David Lord. Celeste to his place on April 23rd and. killed her shortly after, that's the. allegation, there's this, quote, again, this is from the pre-trial brief. "Tellingly, defendant subsequently. purchased tools to carry out his plot to.

dismember and dispose of the victim's. body. On April 24th, 2025, defendant. ordered a shovel from Home Depot that. was delivered to his home from. Postmates. On May 1st, 2025, defendant. ordered and subsequently Amazon. delivered two chainsaws to his home. On. May 5th, 2025, defendant ordered and. Amazon subsequently delivered a body. bag, heavy-duty laundry bags, a blue. inflatable pool to his home. He made. these purchases under the fake name. Victoria Mendez. On May 8th, 2025, defendant returned to the same area in. Santa Barbara County leaving his home. around 11:30 p.m. He returned to the.

area again on May 31st, 2025. This is an. isolated site off SR 154 where the. victim's identification was subsequently. discovered in January 2026. Additionally, on July 7th, 2025, defendant ordered and subsequently. Amazon delivered a burn cage to his home. under the same fake name as part of his. plan to incinerate evidence. How does he. explain those very specific purchases at. that time? Assuming this is true,

assuming these allegations are true, assuming prosecution has the receipts to. back this up, what does he say? Someone. else bought it? Yeah, assuming that's. true, I mean, I've been racking my brain. as a defense lawyer thinking, how would. you address that? What would you say? I. mean, the body bag, I went online to see. if you can order body bags. Yes, you. can. Now, that's part of my search. history, unfortunately, that you can get. body bags online. But, things like the. chainsaws, the blue plastic pool, the. idea that there's a you know, the burn. box, all those things, I mean, the. evidence is really hard to refute if you. have an explanation for that. Like,

there was some professional reason he. needed these things. There was some. >> Like a music video. >> video. >> times, you know. Uh right. So, um is it. a coincidence? Is that just These are. things that I needed and here's the. explanation for why I needed them? That's tough though. Body bags are not. part of your usual Amazon delivery. And. then you go to this idea about the the. Santa Barbara trip, like a very odd. place to allegedly be taking a trip at. this time cuz it says, "Moreover, defendant took horrifying measures to. destroy and discard the victim's body. after placing her body into the blue. inflatable pool to prevent her blood.

from spilling onto his garage floor. Defendant used a chainsaw and perhaps. other tools to cut off her limbs. Small. blue plastic fragments were found. embedded in the victim's remains, which. were collected by the Los Angeles County. Medical Examiner's Department. The. fragments were analyzed by the LAPD's. Forensic Science Division Trace Analysis. Unit. An expert was able to make a. physical fit match from the blue. fragments to the blue inflatable pool. purchased by defendant May in 2025. In. order to distance himself from the. victim, he amputated her left ring and. pinky fingers because her ring finger.

contained a tattoo of his name. Her. fingers have not been recovered. Defendant then placed her head and torso. into the cadaver bag he purchased. He. placed her limbs into a garbage bag. which he deposited into his front trunk. laying the cadaver bag on top. For. several weeks or possibly months, defendant left the victim's body to. decompose inside his Tesla. Okay, John, here's the thing. I've talked about this. before. I'm sure there could be a battle. of the experts about is there a precise. match there? What's her cause of death? I am wondering, and this is something. I've speculated, I'm glad I have you. Is.

there a possibility. he takes the stand and say. Yeah. I got rid of her body. I I I did it. I. did that, but I didn't kill her. I. didn't murder her. You know, we've seen. this in the past in various murder. prosecutions where uh the claim is she. died of natural causes. I got scared. I. decided to uh dispose of the body and. that was wrong of me, but I didn't kill. her. Because the prosecution is going to. have to establish We have all the. circumstantial evidence. Prosecution's. going to have to establish in the minds.

of the jury beyond a reasonable doubt. that he did kill her and it wasn't just. she died for some other from some other. reason and I got scared and disposed of. the body this way. We have seen that in. other prosecutions. It's tough. It's a. tough defense. I feel like and I. mentioned this case so many times, but. it was one that just stands out, the. James Scandirito case out in Florida. I. mean, this guy went on the stand and. testified in graphic detail. Said his. father died, I believe like from an. overdose. He didn't murder him. And he. described in graphic detail what it was.

like to dismember his own father's body. because he panicked. And the way that he. testified, I mean, the jury bought it. They they found him not guilty of. killing his father, but with respect to. discarding of the body. And and I think. it was kind of like the way how really. he was about it and how uncomfortable he. looked about it, almost disgusted. They believed it. And I wonder if that's. something I don't know what the defense. is going to do, but them saying, you. know, he's not the cause of Celeste's. death. Yeah, the charges for improperly.

disposing of a body, cutting up a corpse, they're certainly. less than a murder charge. So, if you. are so convincing on the stand that you. can convince a jury that that's what. happened, that may be the only thing. you've got. >> it goes to the idea of what did happen. to Celeste, right? So, what would he. testify to? I go back to the filing. It. says at approximately 8:40 p.m. on April. 23rd, 2025, defendant sent an Uber to. transport the victim from her Lake. Elsinore home to his residence. They. communicated before and during her Uber. ride, which dropped her off at.

defendant's Hollywood Hills home at. around 10:10 p.m. At approximately 10:30. p.m., so 20 minutes later, defendant. sent text messages to the victim. inquiring where she was. The people. contend this was part of defendant's. premeditated plan to cover up the murder. as she was already dead by this time. Knowing he had to silence the victim. before she ruined his music career as. she had threatened very soon after her. arrival at his home, defendant stabbed. the victim to death multiple times and. stood by while she bled out. At no time. did he call law enforcement or 911 or.

take her to an emergency room to attempt. to save her life. Despite knowing she. was dead and her family was trying to. find her, the evidence will show. defendant lied and claimed he didn't. know where she was. In fact, defendant. drove to Santa Barbara County. immediately after the victim died, attempting to dispose of her property. and destroy evidence at approximately. 11:30 p.m. on April 23rd, 2025, he drove. away from his home as he texted and. called the victim's phone asking where. she was. Again, these were acts. calculated and planned to set up his. defense within a very short timeline. after the victim's vicious murder. Defendant drove his Tesla north on the.

101 freeway to San Marcos Pass Road, SR. 154 near Lake Cachuma in Santa Barbara. County. He returned home early the. following morning on April 24th, 2025. before going to a radio interview for. the release of his album that week. He. sent two additional texts to the. victim's phone that day, which obviously. went unanswered because she was already. dead. After April 26, 2025, defendant. never attempted to contact her again. Defendant's cellular activity and. communications derived from defendant's. iPhone and Tesla, which demonstrate. defendant's activities from April 22nd. to April 24th, including a trip to Santa. Barbara County in the middle of the. night after the victim arrived at his.

Hollywood Hills home. I feel like it's. going to be very hard, if all of that is. true, to deny that digital evidence. So, now it makes me wonder what did he say. happened after she got in the house? Is. there a self-defense argument? Does he. say she was angry? She did something. She tried to attack me. I killed her in. self-defense. >> Yeah, what is there We have to There. would have to be something to back that. up, some type of physical evidence. inside the location. And And maybe he. has the SODD defense, some other dude. did it. Is there somebody else, say, in.

his entourage who he can point the. finger to and say, "This is the person. who did that. I took over as far as. disposing of the evidence. Yeah, that. was wrong, but I didn't commit the. actual murder." We don't know that, but. if you were trying to defend this case, you've got to look at every possibility. And if you can point the finger at. somebody else and say, "That's the. person who did it. He didn't do it at my. direction. I don't know why that. happened, but I mistakenly decided I'm. going to dispose of the evidence.". >> Because the prosecution has come under. fire a little bit by How do you know he. just stood there and watched her bleed.

out? Well, do you say that because we're. looking at the, you know, the message. that he allegedly sent her and because. emergency services weren't called? Are. you speculating? Was there an. eyewitness? Was there surveillance. footage? If not, are those openings for. the defense to say, "You really don't. know. I mean, you don't even have the. murder weapon. You really don't know. what happened behind closed doors or. when exactly she was killed." You know, Steve Fischer, the private investigator, who's been on top of this case, he made. the point that is it possible that he. really didn't know where Celeste was? She walked out of the house, picked her.

up, took her to Santa Barbara County, and maybe something happened there. Yeah, you know, right now the defense is. going through these apparently 40. terabytes of discovery that the. prosecution's turned over. That's why. the the preliminary hearing's been. postponed to the end of June. So, there's a lot of information that the. prosecution doesn't actually have to. tell us, but it will come out in the. discovery production to the defense. And. there may be a lot of things that we. don't even know about that are going to. benefit a defense in this case. But it's. certainly possible that that's. happening. Yeah, but you know, like the. idea of like cuz if it's the idea of.

you know, we before we knew anything, before there was an arrest, there was a. question of well, if there's going to be. no murder charge, if it's just going to. be about concealment of the body, is it. possible Celeste died from natural. causes? Is it's possible Celeste died. from an overdose? You've seen the. medical examiner's report here. Nothing. to indicate that there was an overdose. There was a presence of ethanol, but. they don't believe it was a contributing. factor. There was a discussion about. different drugs, but unless they bring. on a medical examiner to say we're going. to definitively counter what her cause. of death was or say it's undetermined or. you can't tell, and maybe that's.

something David jumps on if he takes the. stand, but how should we be thinking. about it? >> Well, you know what's happening is the. defense is they've got experts looking. at every single piece of that evidence. to decide what is in there that can. benefit a defense. Is there you know, what is the medical evidence? What is. the the tox evidence? Everything that's. you know, that anyone in a regular. normal case would be looking at. They've. got a lot that they have to sort. through, and that's going to take a long. time. But we don't know what's in there. that hasn't been released. If I'm the. prosecutor, do you necessarily want to. release everything to the public that. you know? I mean, there are things. you're going to keep back, but it it's.

it's a tidal wave that they've got to. deal with if you're on the defense side. But even if she the idea that she had an. overdose or died from natural and like. natural causes at that exact time. period, right as she comes to the. allegedly comes to the home, the 10:10. 10:30. I mean, that's going to be that. could be tough. >> Yeah, but you know what? If you're a. skilled defense lawyer, you've got to. look at every single possibility. You. want the jury to have a lot of different. alternatives in their mind. He's going. into this thing with a disadvantage. because of his celebrity status, the. fact that he's got this relationship. with the underage uh girl, but at the.

same time, there may be something that. they they can that the jury will look. at. Well, there'll be a hook for them. that'll say there's reasonable doubt as. far as the murder. And that's the key. thing for the defense. >> I guess it also he has to counter the. narrative that he wanted her dead. He's. got to counter the narrative that she. was a threat. You go back to the filing. says, "Per prosecutors, April 23rd, 2025. is the likely date of the victim's death. and when all her cellular activity. ceased. The night prior, April 22nd, defendant and the victim engaged in a. lengthy argument described in detail in. their text messages. The messages reveal.

the victim's jealousy over defendant's. relationships with other women as. defendant led her to believe they had a. future together. She became extremely. upset and threatened to disclose. damaging information about her. relationship with defendant to end his. career and destroy his life.". Defendant's first studio album was due. to be released on April 25th, 2025. He. had an emerging multi-million dollar. career already in progress. He also had. multiple product endorsements which were. highly profitable. I don't see him. running away from that on the stand. Like, he'll probably talk about the. success of his career and maybe even. counter and said, "Yeah, that's why law. enforcement's coming at me. I'm the.

shiny object, right? I'm the only. person." But, he's got to downplay that. she was a threat. Right. Well, you know, prosecution doesn't have to prove a. motive. They've got a truckload of. motive in this case for the defense to. have to contend with. If the idea is. that the allegation is he's afraid of. being exposed, he's afraid that the. relationship with this underage girl is. going to somehow affect this burgeoning. potential superstardom, prosecution's. going to say, "This is why this took. place." They don't have to prove that to. a jury, but that's what the jury wants. to hear is why did this happen? >> And what do you think he would say about.

that? So, again, it goes back to this. idea, what do you admit about this. alleged relationship or not and what do. you testify to of regarding what were in. those messages? >> Right. The best case for a defense at. this point, based on what we know, is I. had nothing to do with the murder. Yeah, I disposed of a body. That was a bad. decision, but I was scared. Everybody. can understand being scared. Somebody. else committed the murder or she died. from some other cause in a in a in a. case like that. But, if that's the if you can get the jury to. think no evidence of the murder, evidence of the cover-up afterward, that.

may be the best hope you have as a. defense lawyer. So, you don't think he's. going to take the stand? I would be. surprised if he took the stand because. you've got to have an airtight story. from start to finish admitting the. illicit relationship, admitting the. things that led that after the murder. that took place, and you better have. some really good explanation about all. the things that you ordered and why and. why you were not scared about being. exposed. And if he takes the stand, it. would be pretty spectacular. John Day, love having you on. Thanks for taking. the time. Appreciate it. Good stuff. And.

that's all we have for you right now. here on Sidebar, everybody. Thank you so. much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple. Podcast, Spotify, wherever you should. get your podcast. You can also check us. out on NBC's [music] Peacock as well. If. you want to follow me, X, Instagram, my. NewsNation show, Jesse Weber Live, Monday through Friday, 11:00 p.m. Eastern. [music]. I'll see you next time, everybody.