May 10, 2024 • 17 mins
In this special episode of "The Buck Brief," Andrew Giuliani, former Trump White House member and former New York State gubernatorial candidate, joins Buck Sexton for a live discussion from outside the courthouse in New York City. Andrew provides insights into the ongoing Trump trial, highlighting recent testimonies, including Stormy Daniels' cross-examination and Madeline Westerhout's testimony. The conversation explores the trial's timeline, potential outcomes, and the defense's strategy. Buck raises concerns about bias and the trial's focus on non-legal matters, while Andrew discusses the challenges facing Trump's defense team. The episode concludes with a discussion on the broader implications of the trial for free speech and legal defense.
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
You're listening to the Buck Sexton Show podcast, make sure
you subscribe to the podcast on the iHeartRadio app or
wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Hey, everybody, welcome to this special episode of the Buck Brief.
On the scene with us now Live is our friend
Andrew Giuliani, formerly of the Trump White House, former New
York State gubernatorial candidate, president of the Giuliani Defense Fund,
and also friend of mine since we were both playing
(00:42):
in the pee wee leagues for baseball or football or
whatever sports you were playing back in grammar school way
back in the day.
Speaker 1 (00:50):
You a former constituent of you when you were class
president as well.
Speaker 2 (00:54):
Let's be honest, I was school president, Andrew, if we're
talking about it, so, yes, indeed I was school president.
This is true. And then later on your school you
were school president some years later. You were about five
years behind me. So you know, Saint David's turns out.
Speaker 1 (01:09):
Some beep, another sexton't beat me. I'm sorry to interrupt you.
Another sexton't beat me. I was the vice president. But
you know there were some ballot box issues. Wow, never
truly know what the actually.
Speaker 2 (01:19):
I even remember this little buck also known as Keats
came through. You know, you got to look at the
overnight the overnight mail ins, Andrew, the overnight mailings back
in grammar school were a real thing. Got me again,
all right, So now you're standing just for everybody knows
that if you're not watching, if you're only listening, go
to the Buck Brief on YouTube or rumble. Type in
(01:40):
Buck Brief on YouTuber rumble and you can see this yourself.
Andrew is in front of the courthouse in New York
City where he's been reporting live all week of the
Trump trial. Andrew, just give us the overview. What are
you seeing down there? How's it been going so far?
Speaker 3 (01:56):
Well?
Speaker 1 (01:57):
I thought Thursday, in particular May ninth, was really, I
think the best day for the Trump team that I've
seen so far.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
And it happened on a couple of fronts. Obviously.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
Stormy Daniels was introduced as the prosecutor Houston's witness on Tuesday.
Speaker 3 (02:11):
Tuesday, basically the testimony.
Speaker 1 (02:14):
Ended where you had the Trump defense attorney, Susan Nicholas,
finally getting Stormy Daniels to admit on the stand that
money was indeed primarily a motivating factor. What a shocker
there that for a fourn star, money would be a
motivating factor in telling their story. But Thursday, the cross
examination resumed and Susan Nichols was able to point the
(02:36):
holes in the story throughout the years that Stormy Daniels
has had with that alleged encounter in two thousand and six.
You can go back to two thousand and six, twenty eleven,
when Stormy Daniels was saying at the time that there
was never sex. Then fast forward to twenty eighteen when
Stormy Daniels was in fact saying that the alleged sexual
encounter incurred, but said to Anderson Cooper that Donald Trump
(03:00):
was nothing but a gentleman. I never felt threatened by it.
Then you compare that to the testimony that happened on
Tuesday with the prosecution asking Stormy Daniels questions, and she
said that she felt threatened, that she was going to
pass out, that blood was rushing to her head. Susan
Nicholas pointed, I think did a great job in pointing
out just how much that story has changed and really
(03:21):
painted Stormy Daniels to be the liar she we that honestly,
it seems like she she may be. And then Bucking
ended up fast forwarding to later in the day when
Madeline wester Hout, who was the executive assistant to President
Trump from twenty seventeen to twenty nineteen, worked in the
White House.
Speaker 3 (03:40):
Literally the outer Oval Office, a.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
Couple of steps away from the resolute desk in the
Oval Office. Madeline western House was somebody who was fired
because she was taught leaking information on what she thought
was an off the record meeting, and she would have
been a disgruntled former White House employee. I think the
prosecution was relying on that instead. While the prosecution was
asking Madeline wester Howse questions, she broke down and cried
(04:05):
when they were talking about Milania and President Trump's relationship.
She said it she never remembers President Trump laughing more
than when Milania would come visit him in the Opal office,
and that they had a special relationship, and the prosecution,
in my estimation, at that point Buck seemed to end
their questioning very very quickly.
Speaker 3 (04:26):
The defense was able to pick up on that.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
And what could have been a damaging witness to President
Trump turned out to be I think maybe his best
character witness to date.
Speaker 2 (04:36):
You're telling me all this Andrew, because you're observing it
and bringing us the ground truth, if you will, of
this trial. It does strike me though, how is from
the prosecution's perspective, or maybe from the defense perspective, but
the prosecution introducing this stuff, how is any of this
even relevant to a clerical business records dispute or allegation?
(05:01):
Do you know what I'm saying? Like, why is any
of this Trump's relationship with Milania? The specificity of the
alleged encounter with throw me Down? I mean, is the
judge just letting in anything that is prejudicial against Trump?
Is that basically how this has been operating. What's your take?
Speaker 1 (05:19):
It's a great point, Bucket. It's the reason why Todd
blanche another one of the president's defense attorneys, has asked
for a mistrial on multiple occasions. Now the judge not
shockingly has denied that. But really it's turned into, I think,
and for lack of a better word, buck this seems
to be more of trying to smut shame.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
Donald Trump, if you will.
Speaker 1 (05:40):
They're trying to because again, from a legal perspective, there's
still no underlying felony that's been presented, So I think
they're presenting to the jury basically all the different ways
that they believe that Donald Trump is unworthy, all the
different ways that they may be able to actually sully
him in the eyes of the jury, even if they're
(06:01):
not actually discussing any underlying criminal charges in all this.
And that's why, frankly, the Matteline Westerhouse testimony I think
was so long for President Trump, because if that, in
fact is the prosecution's goal and the judge is allowing
him to do that, then man, was it a complete
one to eighty I think that Madeline wester House might
have turned on the prosecution in terms of what their
(06:23):
expectations are. And Buck, you and I know what this
ends up coming down to is is there a juror
in there who is unbiased? Is there a juror in
there who is not predetermined the outcome of this case
based on what they know about Donald Trump? And if
there is in fact a jur that is unbiased, then
he gets acquitted. It's that simple. Looking at what's been
(06:44):
presented so far.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
Let's get to that a little bit more in detail
and where you think this is going. Just a second,
but first off word from our sponsor here bear Creek Arsenal.
I'm a gun guy. I've got a gun safe full
of guns, and i gotta get another gun safe now
because I've got so much Bear Creek Arsenal that I've
been picking up. Bear Creek Arsenal firearms are absolutely phenomenal.
They are the highest quality at the best price you're
gonna find anywhere in the firearms industry. Whole range of calibers.
(07:09):
They're uppers. Their upper receivers and their uppers for AR
fifteen's are absolutely phenomenal. They have premium calibers a fraction
of the price the competition. I know these guys. I
visited with them at their factory in North Carolina. They
are making great guns. I love my Grizzly, which is
my nine millimeter. I use it as my side arm
out at the range doing two gun drills. It's fantastic.
(07:31):
I've also got the BC fifteen highly highly recommend. Just
go see what they've got on the website for yourself.
I remember, you pick out what you like, you buy it,
they send it to your FFL, and you go pick
it up. It's easy. Go to Bear Creek Arsenal dot com,
slash buck that's Bear Creek Arsenal dot com slash buck
use promo code buck for ten percent off your first order.
(07:52):
That's Bear Creek Arsenal dot com slash buck promo code
buck for ten percent off your first order. So, Andrew,
you mentioned if there's one honest juror you at least
get a hung jury, do you think there's any chance
of an acquittal? I know, with all the things a
right against him, it seems unlikely. But have you wiped
away that possibility? Or could you see this jury recognizing
(08:15):
how absurd this whole thing is and just effectively shutting
it down with a not guilty verdict? What do you think?
Speaker 1 (08:22):
Well, it's tough because you and I come at it
from as rational human beings that know how to look
at evidence and try to basically deconstruct it for what
it is, whether it's true, whether it's not. When you're
looking the eyes of a Manhattan jury, who again, eighty
six percent voted for Joe Biden in twenty twenty, seventy
(08:43):
nine percent voted for Alvin Bragg to become the District
Attorney in Manhattan in New York County, then it's tough
to imagine they're actually being an acquittal considering those numbers
and just how much I think the jury could be
stacked against President Trump. But if they are unbiased, and
if there are enough from where they can actually continue
(09:03):
to make the case to themselves while they are going
through this, then look fat back up and equipment backs
back up in acquittal. So I guess that's the best
way to put it. And Buck, I've been looking at
the jury trying to get tells from them. You can
tell that they've been told to not give any reaction
because it's very, very difficult, difficult to get a reaction.
(09:24):
There's only about two or three of the jurors that
will look at President Trump often.
Speaker 3 (09:30):
The other ones kind of keep their eyes on either the.
Speaker 1 (09:34):
Prosecutor or defense if they're asking questions, and the witness.
So I'm trying to get whatever tells I possibly can,
And there are good poker faces on that jury so far.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
And I know that there have been a couple of
a couple of motions made by the defense for mistrial,
those have been those have not been granted yet. When
do we think this trial wraps up?
Speaker 3 (09:55):
Andrew?
Speaker 2 (09:55):
I mean, you're down there, you're speaking everybody, You're seeing
it unfold. When is this thing going to come to
a conclusion.
Speaker 1 (10:02):
So the judge yesterday before before he dismissed the jurors,
said that he believed that actually they were ahead of schedule.
Speaker 3 (10:10):
So in going with they were looking at pre trial.
Then you know, we could be talking about three more weeks.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
I mean, it all depends on how long is Cohen's testimony.
Speaker 3 (10:19):
There's talk that it could be two days.
Speaker 1 (10:21):
There's talk that it could be four days, which would
then spill in to May twentieth, the week of Memorial Day.
So and look at all this, I would guess probably
last week of May early June that we wrap this
thing up.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
And the Cohen testimony that you're that everyone's expecting on Monday,
What can you tell us about how that's supposed to
go and what this is about?
Speaker 1 (10:49):
Well, the interesting thing, Bucket is seeing how all the
prosecution's witnesses that had dealt directly with Michael Cohen had
said on the record to the jury and sometimes even
when the prosecution was questioning them that they had lost
faith in Michael.
Speaker 3 (11:04):
Cohen because they had caught him in lives.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
Both Picks, I think said that Michael Cohen used to
like to consider himself a fixer, but if he fixed anything,
it was because he broke it in the first place.
Keith Davidson said that he Keith Davidson being stormy. Daniel's
former attorney had said that he had lost faith in
Michael Cohen because he had caught him lying to him
on multiple occasions. So I wonder if the prosecution is
(11:29):
almost trying to set the expectations so low with Michael Cohen,
trying to say that this is the guy who had lied,
he had been convicted, he's done his time, and now
he is reformed, and that made what they're trying to
do with regards to Cohen, because I can tell you
right now the defense has so much on cross examination
(11:53):
with Michael Cohen, not just what he was saying ten
fifteen years ago, what he was doing then, how he
had pursured himself, but also what he's been saying recently
on his own podcast, and how he's been going after
President Trump. That in fact, has been a lot of
what the mistrial and lifting the gag order I should
say lifting the gag order conversations has been between Todd
(12:15):
Blanche and Judge Murshan. So it's obviously going to be fascinating,
But I'm very interested to see how the prosecutors, the
prosecution tries to build up Michael Cohen after so many
of their witnesses have completely torn him down and has
basically shown him for the lack of credibility that I
think we all know that Michael has.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
Do you get any sense about the concern that exists
on the Trump side that if Trump continues to push
back against the in my view and many others, completely
unconstitutional gag order, that he actually could be held in contempt,
not just for a fine, but for some kind of
(12:57):
period of incarceration. Is that lingering in the background, because
I know that Eric Adams, Mayor of New York, said
the discussion has been had.
Speaker 1 (13:06):
Yeah, I mean he looked that discussion is with the
Trump team.
Speaker 3 (13:11):
I know.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
Look, you know the President buck he's a double down
kind of guy. And I think there is even some
conversation is in what does it politically look like if
President Trump does in fact get held in contempt and
then you're talking about potentially going to jail for what
we believe is violating the First Amendment of the Constitution
(13:35):
of the United States.
Speaker 3 (13:35):
So that conversation is being had. We'll see if it
gets to there.
Speaker 1 (13:40):
I know it's also one of those things I think
the prosecution is looking at and saying, do we actually
want to go and touch that potential third rail? Could
that actually help President Trump even more? Again, it's we
can't talk about this trial without pointing out the connection
to the Biden Justice Department right there when you see Colangelo,
(14:01):
who is out there doing some of the questioning, some
of the cross examination. This is a guy who's number
three in the Biden just Department at Justice Main in Washington, DC,
and he took at motion that had never happened in
the history of our American judicial system to become an
assistant district.
Speaker 3 (14:20):
Attorney on this case.
Speaker 1 (14:22):
So you know, the prosecution is thinking about the politics
of this at every single step, and as well as
obviously the Trump.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Team Andrew doing great work. Hold for one second, just
one more word from our sponsor here. You know, we're
talking about legal defense and what happens if you're not
Donald Trump. You don't have the resources the power to
fight back. You could get in trouble for speaking up
at a school board meeting, speaking up on campus, speaking
up in your office, if your constitutional rights are violated.
(14:52):
You need to know that there is something for you
out there, but you've got to take action now. Patriot Defender.
Patriot Defender is no cost legal defense right now at
a time we need it most for those who have
their rights violated IRS audit assistance. For example, as part
of this concealed care cary weapon defense, if you have
to use a weapon in defense of yourself and your family, Uh,
(15:14):
the legal costs can be covered patriot deefender dot com.
Patriotdefender dot com the only membership of its kind that
goes beyond defense for concealed carry weapons. Patriot Defender will
cover your constitutional rights and provide you with a defense.
Go to patriot defender dot com for more details. And
you're working, everyone, go to You're doing great work from
(15:34):
down at the courthouse working everyone. Go to follow what
you're doing and see how this plays out.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
Yeah, go on my social media fees at Andrew H.
Jiuliani on x untruth.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (15:46):
And uh, you know, I was inspired basically to do
this as I was in the courtroom and I saw
that CNN had completely misreported what Keith Davidson, Stormy Daniel's
former attorney had said Keith Davidson's full quote was you
lost faith in Michael Cohen because you had caught Michael
Cohen Lyne to him twice on CNN's ticker had said
(16:06):
Keith Davidson lost faith in Michael Cohen. They ended the
quote and they said, in the context of the repayment,
and I said, it's just not fair to the American people. Look, fuck,
you know, I've got my opinions. I'm biased for President Trump.
I had the honor of working for him for four
years in the White House.
Speaker 3 (16:21):
I've known him as long as I've known you.
Speaker 1 (16:24):
But I want to at least present what the witnesses
are saying, what the prosecution is saying, and then in
parentheses you'll see my opinion as well.
Speaker 3 (16:32):
But go to add Andrew H. Giuliani where you can
follow it all.
Speaker 2 (16:35):
I trust the guy, and I've known him. Now we know,
we've known each other like thirty years, Andrew, think about that,
thirty years. We go back. At this point, we're getting old.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
We're getting old, I know, I know, you know. We
still got our hair right now, though, So that's pretty good.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
I guess I want to continue this conversation throughout the generations.
Speaker 3 (16:53):
And through the side by side.
Speaker 2 (16:54):
I love it, and we're going to have you back
to talk more about Trump. So thank you for all
the worker doing on this, and let's hope that this
trial goes toward justice. Although I'm I'm not counting on it.
I'm worried, but I'm hopeful. I'm hopeful we'll win this fight.
Andrew Giuliani, everybody go follow him. And Andrew, thanks again,
thank you very much about it.
You're listening to the Buck Sexton Show podcast, make sure
you subscribe to the podcast on the iHeartRadio app or
wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Hey, everybody, welcome to this special episode of the Buck Brief.
On the scene with us now Live is our friend
Andrew Giuliani, formerly of the Trump White House, former New
York State gubernatorial candidate, president of the Giuliani Defense Fund,
and also friend of mine since we were both playing
(00:42):
in the pee wee leagues for baseball or football or
whatever sports you were playing back in grammar school way
back in the day.
Speaker 1 (00:50):
You a former constituent of you when you were class
president as well.
Speaker 2 (00:54):
Let's be honest, I was school president, Andrew, if we're
talking about it, so, yes, indeed I was school president.
This is true. And then later on your school you
were school president some years later. You were about five
years behind me. So you know, Saint David's turns out.
Speaker 1 (01:09):
Some beep, another sexton't beat me. I'm sorry to interrupt you.
Another sexton't beat me. I was the vice president. But
you know there were some ballot box issues. Wow, never
truly know what the actually.
Speaker 2 (01:19):
I even remember this little buck also known as Keats
came through. You know, you got to look at the
overnight the overnight mail ins, Andrew, the overnight mailings back
in grammar school were a real thing. Got me again,
all right, So now you're standing just for everybody knows
that if you're not watching, if you're only listening, go
to the Buck Brief on YouTube or rumble. Type in
(01:40):
Buck Brief on YouTuber rumble and you can see this yourself.
Andrew is in front of the courthouse in New York
City where he's been reporting live all week of the
Trump trial. Andrew, just give us the overview. What are
you seeing down there? How's it been going so far?
Speaker 3 (01:56):
Well?
Speaker 1 (01:57):
I thought Thursday, in particular May ninth, was really, I
think the best day for the Trump team that I've
seen so far.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
And it happened on a couple of fronts. Obviously.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
Stormy Daniels was introduced as the prosecutor Houston's witness on Tuesday.
Speaker 3 (02:11):
Tuesday, basically the testimony.
Speaker 1 (02:14):
Ended where you had the Trump defense attorney, Susan Nicholas,
finally getting Stormy Daniels to admit on the stand that
money was indeed primarily a motivating factor. What a shocker
there that for a fourn star, money would be a
motivating factor in telling their story. But Thursday, the cross
examination resumed and Susan Nichols was able to point the
(02:36):
holes in the story throughout the years that Stormy Daniels
has had with that alleged encounter in two thousand and six.
You can go back to two thousand and six, twenty eleven,
when Stormy Daniels was saying at the time that there
was never sex. Then fast forward to twenty eighteen when
Stormy Daniels was in fact saying that the alleged sexual
encounter incurred, but said to Anderson Cooper that Donald Trump
(03:00):
was nothing but a gentleman. I never felt threatened by it.
Then you compare that to the testimony that happened on
Tuesday with the prosecution asking Stormy Daniels questions, and she
said that she felt threatened, that she was going to
pass out, that blood was rushing to her head. Susan
Nicholas pointed, I think did a great job in pointing
out just how much that story has changed and really
(03:21):
painted Stormy Daniels to be the liar she we that honestly,
it seems like she she may be. And then Bucking
ended up fast forwarding to later in the day when
Madeline wester Hout, who was the executive assistant to President
Trump from twenty seventeen to twenty nineteen, worked in the
White House.
Speaker 3 (03:40):
Literally the outer Oval Office, a.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
Couple of steps away from the resolute desk in the
Oval Office. Madeline western House was somebody who was fired
because she was taught leaking information on what she thought
was an off the record meeting, and she would have
been a disgruntled former White House employee. I think the
prosecution was relying on that instead. While the prosecution was
asking Madeline wester Howse questions, she broke down and cried
(04:05):
when they were talking about Milania and President Trump's relationship.
She said it she never remembers President Trump laughing more
than when Milania would come visit him in the Opal office,
and that they had a special relationship, and the prosecution,
in my estimation, at that point Buck seemed to end
their questioning very very quickly.
Speaker 3 (04:26):
The defense was able to pick up on that.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
And what could have been a damaging witness to President
Trump turned out to be I think maybe his best
character witness to date.
Speaker 2 (04:36):
You're telling me all this Andrew, because you're observing it
and bringing us the ground truth, if you will, of
this trial. It does strike me though, how is from
the prosecution's perspective, or maybe from the defense perspective, but
the prosecution introducing this stuff, how is any of this
even relevant to a clerical business records dispute or allegation?
(05:01):
Do you know what I'm saying? Like, why is any
of this Trump's relationship with Milania? The specificity of the
alleged encounter with throw me Down? I mean, is the
judge just letting in anything that is prejudicial against Trump?
Is that basically how this has been operating. What's your take?
Speaker 1 (05:19):
It's a great point, Bucket. It's the reason why Todd
blanche another one of the president's defense attorneys, has asked
for a mistrial on multiple occasions. Now the judge not
shockingly has denied that. But really it's turned into, I think,
and for lack of a better word, buck this seems
to be more of trying to smut shame.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
Donald Trump, if you will.
Speaker 1 (05:40):
They're trying to because again, from a legal perspective, there's
still no underlying felony that's been presented, So I think
they're presenting to the jury basically all the different ways
that they believe that Donald Trump is unworthy, all the
different ways that they may be able to actually sully
him in the eyes of the jury, even if they're
(06:01):
not actually discussing any underlying criminal charges in all this.
And that's why, frankly, the Matteline Westerhouse testimony I think
was so long for President Trump, because if that, in
fact is the prosecution's goal and the judge is allowing
him to do that, then man, was it a complete
one to eighty I think that Madeline wester House might
have turned on the prosecution in terms of what their
(06:23):
expectations are. And Buck, you and I know what this
ends up coming down to is is there a juror
in there who is unbiased? Is there a juror in
there who is not predetermined the outcome of this case
based on what they know about Donald Trump? And if
there is in fact a jur that is unbiased, then
he gets acquitted. It's that simple. Looking at what's been
(06:44):
presented so far.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
Let's get to that a little bit more in detail
and where you think this is going. Just a second,
but first off word from our sponsor here bear Creek Arsenal.
I'm a gun guy. I've got a gun safe full
of guns, and i gotta get another gun safe now
because I've got so much Bear Creek Arsenal that I've
been picking up. Bear Creek Arsenal firearms are absolutely phenomenal.
They are the highest quality at the best price you're
gonna find anywhere in the firearms industry. Whole range of calibers.
(07:09):
They're uppers. Their upper receivers and their uppers for AR
fifteen's are absolutely phenomenal. They have premium calibers a fraction
of the price the competition. I know these guys. I
visited with them at their factory in North Carolina. They
are making great guns. I love my Grizzly, which is
my nine millimeter. I use it as my side arm
out at the range doing two gun drills. It's fantastic.
(07:31):
I've also got the BC fifteen highly highly recommend. Just
go see what they've got on the website for yourself.
I remember, you pick out what you like, you buy it,
they send it to your FFL, and you go pick
it up. It's easy. Go to Bear Creek Arsenal dot com,
slash buck that's Bear Creek Arsenal dot com slash buck
use promo code buck for ten percent off your first order.
(07:52):
That's Bear Creek Arsenal dot com slash buck promo code
buck for ten percent off your first order. So, Andrew,
you mentioned if there's one honest juror you at least
get a hung jury, do you think there's any chance
of an acquittal? I know, with all the things a
right against him, it seems unlikely. But have you wiped
away that possibility? Or could you see this jury recognizing
(08:15):
how absurd this whole thing is and just effectively shutting
it down with a not guilty verdict? What do you think?
Speaker 1 (08:22):
Well, it's tough because you and I come at it
from as rational human beings that know how to look
at evidence and try to basically deconstruct it for what
it is, whether it's true, whether it's not. When you're
looking the eyes of a Manhattan jury, who again, eighty
six percent voted for Joe Biden in twenty twenty, seventy
(08:43):
nine percent voted for Alvin Bragg to become the District
Attorney in Manhattan in New York County, then it's tough
to imagine they're actually being an acquittal considering those numbers
and just how much I think the jury could be
stacked against President Trump. But if they are unbiased, and
if there are enough from where they can actually continue
(09:03):
to make the case to themselves while they are going
through this, then look fat back up and equipment backs
back up in acquittal. So I guess that's the best
way to put it. And Buck, I've been looking at
the jury trying to get tells from them. You can
tell that they've been told to not give any reaction
because it's very, very difficult, difficult to get a reaction.
(09:24):
There's only about two or three of the jurors that
will look at President Trump often.
Speaker 3 (09:30):
The other ones kind of keep their eyes on either the.
Speaker 1 (09:34):
Prosecutor or defense if they're asking questions, and the witness.
So I'm trying to get whatever tells I possibly can,
And there are good poker faces on that jury so far.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
And I know that there have been a couple of
a couple of motions made by the defense for mistrial,
those have been those have not been granted yet. When
do we think this trial wraps up?
Speaker 3 (09:55):
Andrew?
Speaker 2 (09:55):
I mean, you're down there, you're speaking everybody, You're seeing
it unfold. When is this thing going to come to
a conclusion.
Speaker 1 (10:02):
So the judge yesterday before before he dismissed the jurors,
said that he believed that actually they were ahead of schedule.
Speaker 3 (10:10):
So in going with they were looking at pre trial.
Then you know, we could be talking about three more weeks.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
I mean, it all depends on how long is Cohen's testimony.
Speaker 3 (10:19):
There's talk that it could be two days.
Speaker 1 (10:21):
There's talk that it could be four days, which would
then spill in to May twentieth, the week of Memorial Day.
So and look at all this, I would guess probably
last week of May early June that we wrap this
thing up.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
And the Cohen testimony that you're that everyone's expecting on Monday,
What can you tell us about how that's supposed to
go and what this is about?
Speaker 1 (10:49):
Well, the interesting thing, Bucket is seeing how all the
prosecution's witnesses that had dealt directly with Michael Cohen had
said on the record to the jury and sometimes even
when the prosecution was questioning them that they had lost
faith in Michael.
Speaker 3 (11:04):
Cohen because they had caught him in lives.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
Both Picks, I think said that Michael Cohen used to
like to consider himself a fixer, but if he fixed anything,
it was because he broke it in the first place.
Keith Davidson said that he Keith Davidson being stormy. Daniel's
former attorney had said that he had lost faith in
Michael Cohen because he had caught him lying to him
on multiple occasions. So I wonder if the prosecution is
(11:29):
almost trying to set the expectations so low with Michael Cohen,
trying to say that this is the guy who had lied,
he had been convicted, he's done his time, and now
he is reformed, and that made what they're trying to
do with regards to Cohen, because I can tell you
right now the defense has so much on cross examination
(11:53):
with Michael Cohen, not just what he was saying ten
fifteen years ago, what he was doing then, how he
had pursured himself, but also what he's been saying recently
on his own podcast, and how he's been going after
President Trump. That in fact, has been a lot of
what the mistrial and lifting the gag order I should
say lifting the gag order conversations has been between Todd
(12:15):
Blanche and Judge Murshan. So it's obviously going to be fascinating,
But I'm very interested to see how the prosecutors, the
prosecution tries to build up Michael Cohen after so many
of their witnesses have completely torn him down and has
basically shown him for the lack of credibility that I
think we all know that Michael has.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
Do you get any sense about the concern that exists
on the Trump side that if Trump continues to push
back against the in my view and many others, completely
unconstitutional gag order, that he actually could be held in contempt,
not just for a fine, but for some kind of
(12:57):
period of incarceration. Is that lingering in the background, because
I know that Eric Adams, Mayor of New York, said
the discussion has been had.
Speaker 1 (13:06):
Yeah, I mean he looked that discussion is with the
Trump team.
Speaker 3 (13:11):
I know.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
Look, you know the President buck he's a double down
kind of guy. And I think there is even some
conversation is in what does it politically look like if
President Trump does in fact get held in contempt and
then you're talking about potentially going to jail for what
we believe is violating the First Amendment of the Constitution
(13:35):
of the United States.
Speaker 3 (13:35):
So that conversation is being had. We'll see if it
gets to there.
Speaker 1 (13:40):
I know it's also one of those things I think
the prosecution is looking at and saying, do we actually
want to go and touch that potential third rail? Could
that actually help President Trump even more? Again, it's we
can't talk about this trial without pointing out the connection
to the Biden Justice Department right there when you see Colangelo,
(14:01):
who is out there doing some of the questioning, some
of the cross examination. This is a guy who's number
three in the Biden just Department at Justice Main in Washington, DC,
and he took at motion that had never happened in
the history of our American judicial system to become an
assistant district.
Speaker 3 (14:20):
Attorney on this case.
Speaker 1 (14:22):
So you know, the prosecution is thinking about the politics
of this at every single step, and as well as
obviously the Trump.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Team Andrew doing great work. Hold for one second, just
one more word from our sponsor here. You know, we're
talking about legal defense and what happens if you're not
Donald Trump. You don't have the resources the power to
fight back. You could get in trouble for speaking up
at a school board meeting, speaking up on campus, speaking
up in your office, if your constitutional rights are violated.
(14:52):
You need to know that there is something for you
out there, but you've got to take action now. Patriot Defender.
Patriot Defender is no cost legal defense right now at
a time we need it most for those who have
their rights violated IRS audit assistance. For example, as part
of this concealed care cary weapon defense, if you have
to use a weapon in defense of yourself and your family, Uh,
(15:14):
the legal costs can be covered patriot deefender dot com.
Patriotdefender dot com the only membership of its kind that
goes beyond defense for concealed carry weapons. Patriot Defender will
cover your constitutional rights and provide you with a defense.
Go to patriot defender dot com for more details. And
you're working, everyone, go to You're doing great work from
(15:34):
down at the courthouse working everyone. Go to follow what
you're doing and see how this plays out.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
Yeah, go on my social media fees at Andrew H.
Jiuliani on x untruth.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (15:46):
And uh, you know, I was inspired basically to do
this as I was in the courtroom and I saw
that CNN had completely misreported what Keith Davidson, Stormy Daniel's
former attorney had said Keith Davidson's full quote was you
lost faith in Michael Cohen because you had caught Michael
Cohen Lyne to him twice on CNN's ticker had said
(16:06):
Keith Davidson lost faith in Michael Cohen. They ended the
quote and they said, in the context of the repayment,
and I said, it's just not fair to the American people. Look, fuck,
you know, I've got my opinions. I'm biased for President Trump.
I had the honor of working for him for four
years in the White House.
Speaker 3 (16:21):
I've known him as long as I've known you.
Speaker 1 (16:24):
But I want to at least present what the witnesses
are saying, what the prosecution is saying, and then in
parentheses you'll see my opinion as well.
Speaker 3 (16:32):
But go to add Andrew H. Giuliani where you can
follow it all.
Speaker 2 (16:35):
I trust the guy, and I've known him. Now we know,
we've known each other like thirty years, Andrew, think about that,
thirty years. We go back. At this point, we're getting old.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
We're getting old, I know, I know, you know. We
still got our hair right now, though, So that's pretty good.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
I guess I want to continue this conversation throughout the generations.
Speaker 3 (16:53):
And through the side by side.
Speaker 2 (16:54):
I love it, and we're going to have you back
to talk more about Trump. So thank you for all
the worker doing on this, and let's hope that this
trial goes toward justice. Although I'm I'm not counting on it.
I'm worried, but I'm hopeful. I'm hopeful we'll win this fight.
Andrew Giuliani, everybody go follow him. And Andrew, thanks again,
thank you very much about it.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Nikki Glaser Podcast
Every week comedian and infamous roaster Nikki Glaser provides a fun, fast-paced, and brutally honest look into current pop-culture and her own personal life.