May 12, 2024 • 31 mins
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 (00:02):
Judge Wan Merchant holding Donald Trump in contempt yet again
for violating his gag order. And now the New York
County judge is now giving a major warning to the President,
telling him that after he has violated his gag order
again during the trial, the next time, well, I'm going
(00:23):
to put you in jail. Yeah, jail time for any
further infractions. If you put Donald Trump in jail while
he's the front runner for the presidency of the United
States America, the backlash could be massive backlash in a
way that I think people would be incredibly angry over
and not just angry, but it could have a huge
(00:48):
impact on changing how things are done. I mean in
a very very, very very big way in this future
with precedent of locking up your political opponents. Now you
go back to this case. In a large part of
this case is the claim that Donald Trump and the
(01:12):
Trump organization falsified records.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
All right, So that's that's part of this that.
Speaker 1 (01:19):
He falsified records, and so therefore, because he falsified these records,
he deserves.
Speaker 2 (01:26):
To go to jail because he was lying.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
I want you to hear what attorney Michael Moore said
on CNN about this. After Trump is being threatened with
jail time, Trump says he's willing to quote unquote make
the sacrifice. Now, this judge is completely out of control,
and now even the attorneys that are liberal are admitting
(01:54):
there's a problem with this case. Is there proof of
Trump falsifying record? Listen to what he said? This is
again on CNN.
Speaker 3 (02:03):
Who could sign a checks? He asked for the accounts
in twenty sixteen and twenty seventeen, and she says, well,
you're talking about mister Trump's personal account and the attorney
says yes, and she says only mister Trump. The attorney
ask again, was that true back in twenty seventeen and twenty.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
Sixteen, She said yes, and she.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
Said it's still that way today, so she is still
working for the organization.
Speaker 2 (02:29):
She further says that.
Speaker 3 (02:30):
If Trump didn't want to sign a check, he certainly
wouldn't do it. Can you give us some sense of
how important this kind of testimony is and how far
this went to help potentially the prosecution make their case
that Donald Trump knew what was going on here because
he signed the checks.
Speaker 4 (02:49):
Well, our testimony was important because it starts to connect
some of the dots, and that is you know, can
you actually put a pin in Donald Trump's hand? Can
you put a check in his hand under his signature?
But that really not the crux of the government's case.
The case deals with heavy falsified records as it relates
to a federal election law, and so that has not
(03:10):
been accomplished yet, so they're moving that way to it.
I mean, this is a paper case. Paper cases are
not inherently interesting. This one is a little different because
it involves are former president. But the prosecutor has to
put some meat on the bone. So if they've sort
of started building out a little bit of the flesh
and they're they're they're getting that way that they're going
to have to now go from he knew about the checks,
(03:31):
he signed the checks over to he actually was involved
or gave some direction, gave some direction as it related
to these false business records that are at issue in
the indictor.
Speaker 1 (03:41):
Proof quote of Trump false fiving records has not been
accomplished yet. The prosecutor has to put some meat on
the bones. Now, that's a guy that thinks Donald Trump
should go to jail. That's a guy that thinks that
Donald Trump should be convicted, and he's saying on CNN,
I mean, they can pick any whack job liberal to
(04:03):
go on there. And he's saying they've not accomplished it yet,
that there's proof that Trump falsified records, and the prosecutor
has to put some meat on the bones. The meat's
not there yet. He's working on it, but it's not
there yet. I mean, this thing's been going on now
for quite a few days. So now the question becomes
(04:23):
what's next. And if you put a president in jail, right,
if you put a president in jail, a former president
and sit, it's America, the front runner. The American people,
without quote meat on the bones are going to respond,
I think accordingly, and say, all right, I'm going to
vote for Donald Trump for damn sure now because of
(04:45):
what you guys are doing, which is what they would
do in Russia. It's what they would do in Cuba,
it's what they do in Venezuela. It's what they would
do in a communist, socialist, Marxist country. Mendela right for examp,
put him in jail, right, kill them, and they do it,
and and Vlada ra Putin does to his opponents, right,
just kills them. All right, you're wait, you're an outposition leader. Okay,
(05:08):
I'll just kill you. Jeff Duncan, by the way, this
made me laugh this morning. He was on TV. This
has happened about thirty minutes ago, and as he says, quote,
as Republicans, we have to take our medicine and vote
for Biden and cast Trump out. This was a conversation
on seeing in this morning. Now this is again they're like, oh, well,
(05:29):
Jeff's Republican.
Speaker 2 (05:30):
What do we got to do? Well, we got to
vote against Trump. We got to vote for Joe Biden.
Speaker 1 (05:33):
Really, that's how desperate CNN now is to make their
case that you got to vote for that, you got
to vote for Joe Biden over Donald Trump.
Speaker 5 (05:41):
Yet again, listen, Jeff Duncan is with me now along
with CNN senior political commentator, a former special assistant at
President George W. Bush, Scott Jennings. All right, Lieutenant Governor,
we're listening convinced Republicans Scott Jennings and your other fellow
Republicans that they should vote for President Biden.
Speaker 6 (06:00):
Well, enough's enough.
Speaker 7 (06:01):
Donald Trump is not our future, he's not our president.
And now looking back, he certainly wasn't our past. Donald
Trump's a fake Republican. He's proven that over and over
and over again. He simply wants the position of president
to be powerful, and he's willing to lie, cheat, and
steal for it. And if we're going to fix this
party and go forward the party that is conservative but
not crazy and angry, we've got to do it without
(06:22):
Donald Trump. And I know it makes sense to try
to elect a Republican to be the president. But if
we can get past Donald Trump, have a Republican controlled Congress,
we can have a firewall in place, and then we
can take the next four years to fix our party
and get a legitimate candidate forward that can lead us
in the right direction.
Speaker 5 (06:41):
Scott, I don't want you to feel like you have
to answer on behalf of Donald Trump, But as a
life long Republican, how do you think most Republicans will
take this?
Speaker 8 (06:52):
Well, most Republicans are not going to vote for Joe Biden.
Very few Republicans are going to vote for Joe Biden.
Of course, the political analysis question for Donald Trump is
will enough Republicans or Republican leaners vote for Joe Biden
to help him win the presidency? I think Jeff is
speaking for a very small minority of the party. They're
going to take that position. But at the same time,
(07:12):
there are going to be some Democrats, maybe a lot
more Democrats, that decide to vote for Donald Trump. I
actually think this election is an interesting scramble. You're going
to see people who you would traditionally think of as
supporting one party shift to the other. It's Jeff's you know,
he's the kind of a voter. I think that it
represents the shifting sands of our politics under Trump and Biden,
(07:33):
and the kinds of coalitions that they're both able to attract.
You see it in all the polling and certainly seems
to be reflected in Jeff's opinion piece Toda, though, I
have to say one comment about Jeff's argument. You know,
he wants to elect a Republican Congress as a firewall
that does nothing to restrict the President of the United
States from all executive action that they can take. And
I think most Republicans would say the most harm Joe
(07:54):
Biden has done has been on executive action, ignoring the
Supreme Court and so on and so forth, and so
having Republican Congress doesn't save you from that unless you're
willing to impeach a president.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
I love how Jennings responded to this fake Republican, this
establishment Republicans, like, oh, well, you're gonna have to take
our medicine, and we've got to get rid of Donald Trump.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
He's not a real conservative. He's not a conservative guy.
Speaker 1 (08:16):
Look, I have my doubts when he ran in sixteen,
but he proved himself to be extremely conservative while president
of the United States of America. That's the reality of
Donald Trump. And the idea that the Republican Party has
left Trump is laughable. How many of you think Donald
Trump is the Republican Party because I think he is
(08:37):
the Republican Party.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
Five three five nine seven three two.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
I don't think he's And this idea that there's a
bunch of Republicans out there right now that are going
to vote for Joe Biden, I don't believe that for
a moment. I think you had a better case for
that argument four years ago than you do right now
because of just how bad things are in this country.
Speaker 2 (08:59):
All right.
Speaker 1 (08:59):
One of the thing I want to get you updated
on that is this the Stormy Daniels testimony. It was
a you know what show it was a joke yesterday.
I didn't get to talk about this much earlier, but
I want you to hear this. As even MSNBC said,
it was a bad look for Stormy Daniels and a
bad look for the prosecution her testimony.
Speaker 9 (09:22):
Listen now, while we saw Lisa describe what she saw
from the overflow room, you, Harry, were actually inside the courtroom,
and so much of what you saw and experienced are
things that are being processed, potentially even now by members
of the jury. And so we want you to take
us inside that room. What you saw, what you felt,
(09:45):
and any interaction between the President and Stormy Daniels, Stormy
Daniels and that jury.
Speaker 10 (09:52):
I can speak to the first There wasn't any, but
there was a lot to see, especially with the jury.
We're talking about a very very colorful witness who detailed
kinds of events and just you know, efforts and ways
of being that I think for the jury were fairly foreign.
She spoke very quickly, nervously. She told a lot of jokes,
(10:15):
and not all of them landed. As Lisa said. Mary
Chan was quick to sustain objections and clearly thought there
was too much detail being given to the jury. I
watched the jury very carefully, and I thought, in particular,
there were three or four who were maybe not with her,
and others who were all the basics of Michael Cohen's story.
Speaker 2 (10:38):
Everything we've heard so far.
Speaker 10 (10:39):
She substantiates, but she does this in a very wild,
sort of super colorful way that I think for some
of the jurors maybe made their head spin a bit.
And there is this basic question about she almost seems
to have experienced the sex itself as sort of surreal.
Yet a year in sues where she continues to be
(11:01):
in touch with him, and she says the ultimate nda
she wanted to enter into because she was afraid, based
on an encounter in a parking lot, that Trump was
trying to actually silence her, and she wanted him out.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Of the picture as well.
Speaker 10 (11:19):
She disclaimed money having anything really to do with it.
My basic feeling is like, Wow, this is a colorful,
maybe hyper colorful witness.
Speaker 9 (11:28):
But how much was the jury also watching Donald Trump
and maybe his reaction.
Speaker 2 (11:34):
To some of those very.
Speaker 9 (11:39):
Just let's say, details of that sexual encounter, right.
Speaker 10 (11:44):
So I looked for that pretty carefully. It was mainly
on Stormy they were taking her in. I was looking
at Trumps some and he had a general kind of impassiveness,
not glowering exactly, but obviously not happy. But the basic
dynamic was jury to Stormy. And then again, I haven't
(12:06):
seen Mayr chun this in this trial be so sort
of irritated, and it came across I think as being
irritated with her level of detail.
Speaker 2 (12:16):
That's something if.
Speaker 10 (12:17):
You're the DA you're worried about because you don't want
them to think that he the judge is actually I'm
displeased in any way with the witness.
Speaker 1 (12:27):
You listen to that report and they're basically saying it's
a dumpster fire. Now there's also an obsession by the
media to put Trump in jail, and that's what the
left is fantasizing over right now. They want to get
him in jail. I want you to hear what they
had to say on the view about the idea of
Trump being behind bars.
Speaker 11 (12:47):
I'm sort of conflicted about whether or not he should
be held in contempt and put in He's already been
held in contempt, but put in jail for it. But
I do think that seventy one percent of Americans have
said that he should be put in jail if he
is convicted. The other thing, I will say, we all
saw many of us are old enough to have seen
the OJ case. I remember how Judge Ito lost complete
control of the courtroom, and I think that had a
(13:09):
lot to do with the win. You cannot let Donald
Trump be a runaway train in that courtroom. No, it's
not his courtroom, it's the judge's courtroom. And so I
think that make a point to prove a point. Put
him in a clink.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
Oh why not put him?
Speaker 5 (13:27):
Oh?
Speaker 6 (13:30):
I don't want this to sound like I'm doing wishful thinking. Yes,
but which prison would be best?
Speaker 2 (13:38):
I give you, Michael, Well.
Speaker 9 (13:41):
That's what i've That's what I have from number one.
Speaker 12 (13:44):
Cha.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
But you know, I'm okay.
Speaker 6 (13:48):
If he goes to Alcatraz and they reopened it, maybe.
Speaker 2 (13:53):
You know what about one time obank?
Speaker 11 (13:57):
Okay, y'all, that'd be close to mari A Lago, Milania
can come and visit, that's right.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
What about supermax?
Speaker 11 (14:05):
Supermax would be into to tell Chappo was a Supermax
he you know, pan now he wants to be with
the get people.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
Come on.
Speaker 6 (14:13):
So these are my suggestions.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
What anybody wants to know. Actually, I want to be clear.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
ABC News is paying these people on the View, including
Whoopy Goldberg, to fantasize about Donald Trump going to Guantanamo Bay,
where the mastermind of nine to eleven, Khalid Sheik Mohammad
is can can you just let that sinc in? And
(14:45):
and they're laughing about it. This is a political witch
hunt on a level we've never seen before in this country.
Caitlin Collins, by the way at CNN mocking the President
of the United States of America saying he's afraid of jail.
He doesn't want to go to jail. Listen to this.
Speaker 8 (15:01):
Violation of the gag order since then, and my sense
is he probably won't.
Speaker 13 (15:05):
I just want to read more of what the judge
actually said to Trump today. He said, mister Trump, it's
important to understand the last thing I want to do
is put you in jail. You're the former president of
the United States and possibly the next president as well.
There are many reasons why incarceration is truly a last resort.
For me to take that step would be disruptive and
to these proceedings, which I imagine you want to end
as quickly as possible, just politically Caitlin.
Speaker 2 (15:30):
What would this mean.
Speaker 12 (15:33):
I mean, the argument is that Trump would relish it
in the sense that he would be able to argue
what he's been arguing every day outside that courtroom, that
he is being politically persecuted here, that he can't use
his First Amendment ride he can't speak freely, that this
is protected political speech. The idea that Donald Trump actually
would want to go to jail is ridiculous. Anyone who
knows him knows that he doesn't even like to stay
(15:55):
in a hotel when he goes on foreign trips. When
he went as president, it was a whole thing to
actually get him to stay over night in places. So
this idea that he actually does want to do this
For the optics perspective, I mean, when you speak to
his closest advisors, they'll allies. They'll say that's completely far fetched.
They do they think it would work to their advantage,
maybe politically, But I do think Donald Trump heating this
(16:16):
is something that you never see Donald Trump do, which
is actually watching his words, and he keeps acknowledging that
every time he goes into that courtroom, even if he
is lying about what the gag order actually says, he
can and cannot do. He is being careful. And he
did the same thing after the Egen Carroll verdict came
out where he was found to have defamed her and
it was going to cost him a lot of money.
He changed the way that he would speak publicly about.
Speaker 14 (16:38):
Her until until he defended her with you in your
in your town hall, and then she ended up bringing
him back to court over that incident.
Speaker 1 (16:47):
I love how at the very end they're like except
you're lying, Like her own colleague is like, no, that's
not what happened with Donald Trump, and you should know
it because it was during your interview that that's not
what he did.
Speaker 2 (17:01):
Leave it to CNN, So you.
Speaker 1 (17:04):
Got them fantasizing about Trump going to jail and get
mo or algatraz.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
This is insane. It's absolutely insane. It is insane.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
One of the guests this morning, Trekowski Kati Turkowski, said
Trump's Hushmanny trial is a coordinated effort.
Speaker 2 (17:25):
She described it for sure, saying this is all a ruse.
Speaker 15 (17:29):
And the big story that Fox News had now with
teams at Ma Chlangelo, who.
Speaker 2 (17:33):
Is leading the prosecution.
Speaker 15 (17:34):
He left a great job with the Biden administration Department
of Justice to take this crappy job in New York,
and now it turns out that he has been paid
in the past by the DNC. Do you think the
data is significant or does it for the four to
five President Trump's opinion that somehow the Democratic Party is
behind this?
Speaker 16 (17:53):
Well, I think for Colangelo's purposes, this is very personal.
He obviously has been obsessed with getting Trump. He came
to this office to pursue this prosecution that nobody else
wanted to pursue. The Fence didn't want to pursue this,
the DA's office here in Manhattan did not want to
pursue this. So this is a coordinated effort for sure.
And I think a lot of people see that it
is political.
Speaker 15 (18:11):
And he worked for of tissue James too right, and
the judge donated to Joe Biden. But of course when
the president Knight's former president United States says, real Button's
behind it, they go, there's no proof of them.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
You look at this, It is a coordinated effort. Every
bit of this is coordinated. Every ounce of this was
premeditated by them, and that is that. I think the
biggest problem here that the prosecution is going to have
is that Donald Trump has been so clear and as
(18:45):
it was described this warning, there's still not enough meat
on these bones, like there just isn't. There's not enough
meat on the bones to convict him of doing something
like this. Claire mccaskell talking with former White House Press
secretary about what's happening here with the hush money case,
and I want you to hear what she said. And
(19:05):
again media is still trying to sell this to you
that this matters these.
Speaker 14 (19:09):
Dates today and I was thinking to myself, like so
many moments, we need to remind people, this is not normal.
You have been in the Oval Office, you are a
former senator, you're a former prosecutor.
Speaker 9 (19:19):
Talk to me about what you have heard about what
he was.
Speaker 14 (19:23):
Doing from the Oval Office, well, managing the presidency. How
crazy is this to you?
Speaker 6 (19:28):
Well, you know, this goes out of the categories where
two numb. We have taken in so much of not
normal that all of a sudden we aren't focused as
we should be on how he abused the solemnity of
that office. If somebody would have when I would have
time with my friend the former President Obama, we would
(19:52):
even go back into the dining room or sometimes into
his smaller office, if we were going to really talk
casually because there was such respect around the Oval and
what it was a symbol. It was a symbol. Now
you think about if I would have mentioned to President Obama,
imagine that they're going to have an episode of Zeque
(20:13):
where the president is signing checks to pay off a
lawyer who gave hush money to a porn store. You
know what the President Obama would have said, Claire, your
imagination has gone crazy. Now have never happened in the
United States of America. No, Jen, I want to talk
about January eleventh, twenty seventeen.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
By the way, can we just chat for one moment
about Claire mccaskell here in the part that makes me
laugh the most about what she just said, she acts
like the Oval Office is this amazing place that these
actions are beneath the presidency? Can we remind them of
Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky in the Intern hookup? Wasn't
(20:56):
that the Oval Office? Wasn't that the Oval Office? You
guys are Oh, there's so many things that we would
not say, right, There's so many things that we would
have said differently. There's so many things that we would
have done differently. There's so many things that would have
been We would have changed right, We would have changed it.
(21:16):
I tell you, we would have changed it so many things,
so many things. This guy in the Oval office was
hooking up with an intern, and they act like it's
such a place of reverency. You gotta laugh. I mean,
I'm sorry, you have to laugh at this. I want
to play for you real quick what Donald Trump said
(21:39):
before he walked into the courthouse. And the reason why
is because there's two points here. One yay talks about
the fact that this judge has found him in contempt
for the tenth time. It's ten thousand dollars total and
fines a thousand freach charge, and now the judge saying, hey,
I'm gonna put you in jail, and I want you
to listen to Trump and how he reached bonds that
(22:00):
first off. But the second thing I want you to
notice is how quickly he pivots and goes back to
the issues. For example, the Columbia University just canceled their commencement,
and he says that shouldn't have happened, like this is
unfair to the students, all because the radical extremists on
the left and there's a focus part here that I
love about Trump, Like, yes, he's being clearly there's election
(22:23):
interference going on, like that is so clear, but he's
still staying focused on the issues for the American people
at the very same time. Take a listen to Trump
as he's walking into the court.
Speaker 17 (22:37):
This is the first question, as you know, they've taken
away my constitutional right, so I'm not allowed to answer
to that question. This has never happened in this country before.
It's a ridiculous thing. It's a ridiculous case.
Speaker 6 (22:50):
I did nothing.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
Wrong, absolutely nothing wrong.
Speaker 18 (22:53):
I take a look at Greg Jared this morning, he
went on, take a look at.
Speaker 17 (22:57):
Andrew McCartney or Jonathan Journally or ankle who.
Speaker 18 (23:01):
It's like they say, there's no case here, and yet
the judges gagged me, and I'm not allowed to talk
about I guess his total conflict. The judge is totally
confident it could be conflicted, and you ought to take
a look at it. And I'm not supposed to be
talking about it, but I am allowed to say that
(23:22):
the judge is a conflict that like nobody's ever happy
for you to take a look at it. He's taken
away my constitutional right to speak. I was in Miami
this weekend and reported the rescue me questions the same
questions like you're asking me and I have to say
I have a gaggle or I can't speak about it.
Never happened before ever. Number one. Number two, it's a
(23:43):
fake trial. They have no case, and it's been absolutely
proven now that no case whatsoever. This is Alvin Bragg
doing it for political reasons for Biden. This is a
biiten trial. He's a crooked president. Now, it just came
out Almia just canceled their commentional axioms. Columbia just canceled
(24:04):
their commensal.
Speaker 14 (24:05):
That shouldn't happen.
Speaker 18 (24:07):
And it also came out that the protesters, many of
the protesters are backed by Biden's donors. Okay, are you
listening Israel? I hope you're listening Israel, Hope you're getting smarter.
But they're back by Biden donors. That's where the money's
coming from. And I'm not surprised at all. There's many
(24:28):
other articles, many of them having to do with the
gag order, the unconstitutionality of having to do with the
gag order, and it is unconstitutional and it shouldn't be allowed.
And I wish people could prove a little bit quicker
the appellent courts, because the whole world is watching this
and they see what's happening. More importantly, Franklin, they have
(24:49):
no case, they have absolutely no case. It's a political hopes,
it's election interference. Anything they can do, and even the
witnesses they want to bring up the nothing to do
with the case. This is a ridiculous situation and he's
not fair, not.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Fair, but we will, like thank you, but we will fight.
Speaker 1 (25:09):
You can hear the President going back to that and saying, look,
we still have business here that we got to deal with.
We still have a country in essence to save, and
so I'm going to tell you what's going on, but
I'm also going to move on now. All of this
is happening, by the way, right now, while there's something
else that the Democrats are going to have to deal with,
this reality. The judge and brag and everyone involved in
(25:33):
this case, they say there's nothing political here. A right,
they're lying, and I think most Americans have figured that out.
Like they're lying, that's number one. But if you're gonna
hold the line here that this is real and something
that was supposed to happen, and it was something that
we needed to happen. If that's the line, then don't
(25:53):
you have to put Trump in jail if he violates
it yet again, which I have no do he's going
to and then you got to stick by that. But
then there's Democrats that are going to say, wow, no, no, no,
just find him again, right, just just just find him again.
Don't don't put him in jail because that will be
the biggest backfire we've ever seen. So if you don't
(26:17):
put Trump in jail at this point, then it doesn't
that speak to just how political this whole entire witch
hunt actually is. That you are willing to arrest him,
You're willing to try to ruin his life, You're you're
willing to go to trial over charges that Alvin Bragg
said he would bring if he gets elected and.
Speaker 2 (26:37):
Is raising money off of that.
Speaker 1 (26:39):
The federal government wouldn't even take the case because they
said that there was no evidence that a crime was
committed here. And then you do this the way that
they did it in court basically the second go round,
so it's not federal charges, and they say.
Speaker 2 (26:53):
Oh, this isn't political.
Speaker 1 (26:54):
Okay, if it's not political, then you got to put
Trump in jail. And if you don't put him in
jail and you keep finding him one thousand dollars over
and over and over and over again, then you are
admitting by not putting him in jail that this is
in fact political because you're afraid that if you put
him in jail, that it's going to affect the outcome
of the election. Like if you want to see and
(27:16):
they know this, this judge knows this.
Speaker 2 (27:18):
Alvin Bragg has to know this. If you actually locked up.
Speaker 1 (27:22):
Can you imagine seeing a former president of the United
States of America and you want to talk about election
interference putting him in jail?
Speaker 2 (27:31):
Donald Trump in jail.
Speaker 1 (27:32):
There's been word that's been coming out that Donald Trump
or the Secret Service are now planning for actual contingencies
how they would keep a former president safe while in prison,
Like while in prison, and what does that look like.
Speaker 2 (27:47):
You can't put him with the rest of the prison population.
Speaker 1 (27:50):
You're going to have to completely isolate him from everybody
else because your job is to keep the president safe.
So what does it look like if you do this,
and if you do it, the president that the Secret
Service are going to have to be involved in every
step of this. It's not like you just say I'm
putting you in jail and then you walk out the
baylists grab you and they take you back behind the court.
(28:12):
It didn't work that way. But if you want to
see American patriots get angry, put Donald Trump in jail.
And if you don't do it, and he does quote
cross the line again and then you purposely don't put
him in jail after you make this threat, then it
goes back again to proving the point this is all
political from the very beginning. They're what they're wanting to do,
(28:35):
and what they're trying to do is put Donald Trump
in a court room so that Donald Trump can't go
out in campaign. Okay, that's the whole ballgame here, and
they know it, and Trump knows it. And by the way,
Donald Trump is also called for the arrest of Jack Smith,
the special prosecutor, after prosecutors ad met to misleading a
(28:56):
judge on evidence that they tampered with several revelations last
week that the special counsel Jack Smith's team had mishandled
evidence in the trial of former President Trump over his
allegedly criminal mismanagement of classified documents. Trump then went on
social media to demand the case against him be dropped
and that Smith himself be prosecuted instead, saying, quote, it
(29:19):
has always been clear that the documents case is nothing
but an election interference scam concocted by crooked Joe Biden
and deranged Jack Smith and their hacks and thugs.
Speaker 2 (29:32):
That's what he said.
Speaker 1 (29:33):
On Friday, he said, now derange Jack Smith has had
to admit in a filing in front of Judge Cannon
to what I've been saying happened since the illegal raid
on my home at Marlago, that he and his team
committed blatant evidence tampering by mishandling the very boxes they
used as a pretext to bring this fake case. These
(29:54):
deeply illegal actions by the politicized prosecutors mandate that this,
this whole witch hunt to be dropped immediately. He added
in the box's hoaxes MAGA twenty twenty four. He then
put at the end of that post on true Social.
Hours later, Trump returned a true Social account to demand
that Smith be quote arrested, saying, arrest arranged Jack Smith.
(30:19):
He is a criminal based on the fact that there
was evidence tampering going on as a pretext to getting
in and having a raid at mar Lago again. I
hope they put Trump in jail. I mean that because
I think the world will, I think the United States
of America will stand up and say, this is out
of control radicalism by the extreme left. This is a weaponization,
(30:44):
the politicalization of the Justice Department, and people will say
that is a step too far. And by the way,
that's exactly why I think this judge won't do it.
He can threaten it all he once, but this is
why I think he won't actually do it. Make sure
you share this podcast please with your family and friends
so everybody you know get to hear what we're exposing
(31:05):
here every day.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
And I'll see you back here tomorrow
Judge Wan Merchant holding Donald Trump in contempt yet again
for violating his gag order. And now the New York
County judge is now giving a major warning to the President,
telling him that after he has violated his gag order
again during the trial, the next time, well, I'm going
(00:23):
to put you in jail. Yeah, jail time for any
further infractions. If you put Donald Trump in jail while
he's the front runner for the presidency of the United
States America, the backlash could be massive backlash in a
way that I think people would be incredibly angry over
and not just angry, but it could have a huge
(00:48):
impact on changing how things are done. I mean in
a very very, very very big way in this future
with precedent of locking up your political opponents. Now you
go back to this case. In a large part of
this case is the claim that Donald Trump and the
(01:12):
Trump organization falsified records.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
All right, So that's that's part of this that.
Speaker 1 (01:19):
He falsified records, and so therefore, because he falsified these records,
he deserves.
Speaker 2 (01:26):
To go to jail because he was lying.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
I want you to hear what attorney Michael Moore said
on CNN about this. After Trump is being threatened with
jail time, Trump says he's willing to quote unquote make
the sacrifice. Now, this judge is completely out of control,
and now even the attorneys that are liberal are admitting
(01:54):
there's a problem with this case. Is there proof of
Trump falsifying record? Listen to what he said? This is
again on CNN.
Speaker 3 (02:03):
Who could sign a checks? He asked for the accounts
in twenty sixteen and twenty seventeen, and she says, well,
you're talking about mister Trump's personal account and the attorney
says yes, and she says only mister Trump. The attorney
ask again, was that true back in twenty seventeen and twenty.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
Sixteen, She said yes, and she.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
Said it's still that way today, so she is still
working for the organization.
Speaker 2 (02:29):
She further says that.
Speaker 3 (02:30):
If Trump didn't want to sign a check, he certainly
wouldn't do it. Can you give us some sense of
how important this kind of testimony is and how far
this went to help potentially the prosecution make their case
that Donald Trump knew what was going on here because
he signed the checks.
Speaker 4 (02:49):
Well, our testimony was important because it starts to connect
some of the dots, and that is you know, can
you actually put a pin in Donald Trump's hand? Can
you put a check in his hand under his signature?
But that really not the crux of the government's case.
The case deals with heavy falsified records as it relates
to a federal election law, and so that has not
(03:10):
been accomplished yet, so they're moving that way to it.
I mean, this is a paper case. Paper cases are
not inherently interesting. This one is a little different because
it involves are former president. But the prosecutor has to
put some meat on the bone. So if they've sort
of started building out a little bit of the flesh
and they're they're they're getting that way that they're going
to have to now go from he knew about the checks,
(03:31):
he signed the checks over to he actually was involved
or gave some direction, gave some direction as it related
to these false business records that are at issue in
the indictor.
Speaker 1 (03:41):
Proof quote of Trump false fiving records has not been
accomplished yet. The prosecutor has to put some meat on
the bones. Now, that's a guy that thinks Donald Trump
should go to jail. That's a guy that thinks that
Donald Trump should be convicted, and he's saying on CNN,
I mean, they can pick any whack job liberal to
(04:03):
go on there. And he's saying they've not accomplished it yet,
that there's proof that Trump falsified records, and the prosecutor
has to put some meat on the bones. The meat's
not there yet. He's working on it, but it's not
there yet. I mean, this thing's been going on now
for quite a few days. So now the question becomes
(04:23):
what's next. And if you put a president in jail, right,
if you put a president in jail, a former president
and sit, it's America, the front runner. The American people,
without quote meat on the bones are going to respond,
I think accordingly, and say, all right, I'm going to
vote for Donald Trump for damn sure now because of
(04:45):
what you guys are doing, which is what they would
do in Russia. It's what they would do in Cuba,
it's what they do in Venezuela. It's what they would
do in a communist, socialist, Marxist country. Mendela right for examp,
put him in jail, right, kill them, and they do it,
and and Vlada ra Putin does to his opponents, right,
just kills them. All right, you're wait, you're an outposition leader. Okay,
(05:08):
I'll just kill you. Jeff Duncan, by the way, this
made me laugh this morning. He was on TV. This
has happened about thirty minutes ago, and as he says, quote,
as Republicans, we have to take our medicine and vote
for Biden and cast Trump out. This was a conversation
on seeing in this morning. Now this is again they're like, oh, well,
(05:29):
Jeff's Republican.
Speaker 2 (05:30):
What do we got to do? Well, we got to
vote against Trump. We got to vote for Joe Biden.
Speaker 1 (05:33):
Really, that's how desperate CNN now is to make their
case that you got to vote for that, you got
to vote for Joe Biden over Donald Trump.
Speaker 5 (05:41):
Yet again, listen, Jeff Duncan is with me now along
with CNN senior political commentator, a former special assistant at
President George W. Bush, Scott Jennings. All right, Lieutenant Governor,
we're listening convinced Republicans Scott Jennings and your other fellow
Republicans that they should vote for President Biden.
Speaker 6 (06:00):
Well, enough's enough.
Speaker 7 (06:01):
Donald Trump is not our future, he's not our president.
And now looking back, he certainly wasn't our past. Donald
Trump's a fake Republican. He's proven that over and over
and over again. He simply wants the position of president
to be powerful, and he's willing to lie, cheat, and
steal for it. And if we're going to fix this
party and go forward the party that is conservative but
not crazy and angry, we've got to do it without
(06:22):
Donald Trump. And I know it makes sense to try
to elect a Republican to be the president. But if
we can get past Donald Trump, have a Republican controlled Congress,
we can have a firewall in place, and then we
can take the next four years to fix our party
and get a legitimate candidate forward that can lead us
in the right direction.
Speaker 5 (06:41):
Scott, I don't want you to feel like you have
to answer on behalf of Donald Trump, But as a
life long Republican, how do you think most Republicans will
take this?
Speaker 8 (06:52):
Well, most Republicans are not going to vote for Joe Biden.
Very few Republicans are going to vote for Joe Biden.
Of course, the political analysis question for Donald Trump is
will enough Republicans or Republican leaners vote for Joe Biden
to help him win the presidency? I think Jeff is
speaking for a very small minority of the party. They're
going to take that position. But at the same time,
(07:12):
there are going to be some Democrats, maybe a lot
more Democrats, that decide to vote for Donald Trump. I
actually think this election is an interesting scramble. You're going
to see people who you would traditionally think of as
supporting one party shift to the other. It's Jeff's you know,
he's the kind of a voter. I think that it
represents the shifting sands of our politics under Trump and Biden,
(07:33):
and the kinds of coalitions that they're both able to attract.
You see it in all the polling and certainly seems
to be reflected in Jeff's opinion piece Toda, though, I
have to say one comment about Jeff's argument. You know,
he wants to elect a Republican Congress as a firewall
that does nothing to restrict the President of the United
States from all executive action that they can take. And
I think most Republicans would say the most harm Joe
(07:54):
Biden has done has been on executive action, ignoring the
Supreme Court and so on and so forth, and so
having Republican Congress doesn't save you from that unless you're
willing to impeach a president.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
I love how Jennings responded to this fake Republican, this
establishment Republicans, like, oh, well, you're gonna have to take
our medicine, and we've got to get rid of Donald Trump.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
He's not a real conservative. He's not a conservative guy.
Speaker 1 (08:16):
Look, I have my doubts when he ran in sixteen,
but he proved himself to be extremely conservative while president
of the United States of America. That's the reality of
Donald Trump. And the idea that the Republican Party has
left Trump is laughable. How many of you think Donald
Trump is the Republican Party because I think he is
(08:37):
the Republican Party.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
Five three five nine seven three two.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
I don't think he's And this idea that there's a
bunch of Republicans out there right now that are going
to vote for Joe Biden, I don't believe that for
a moment. I think you had a better case for
that argument four years ago than you do right now
because of just how bad things are in this country.
Speaker 2 (08:59):
All right.
Speaker 1 (08:59):
One of the thing I want to get you updated
on that is this the Stormy Daniels testimony. It was
a you know what show it was a joke yesterday.
I didn't get to talk about this much earlier, but
I want you to hear this. As even MSNBC said,
it was a bad look for Stormy Daniels and a
bad look for the prosecution her testimony.
Speaker 9 (09:22):
Listen now, while we saw Lisa describe what she saw
from the overflow room, you, Harry, were actually inside the courtroom,
and so much of what you saw and experienced are
things that are being processed, potentially even now by members
of the jury. And so we want you to take
us inside that room. What you saw, what you felt,
(09:45):
and any interaction between the President and Stormy Daniels, Stormy
Daniels and that jury.
Speaker 10 (09:52):
I can speak to the first There wasn't any, but
there was a lot to see, especially with the jury.
We're talking about a very very colorful witness who detailed
kinds of events and just you know, efforts and ways
of being that I think for the jury were fairly foreign.
She spoke very quickly, nervously. She told a lot of jokes,
(10:15):
and not all of them landed. As Lisa said. Mary
Chan was quick to sustain objections and clearly thought there
was too much detail being given to the jury. I
watched the jury very carefully, and I thought, in particular,
there were three or four who were maybe not with her,
and others who were all the basics of Michael Cohen's story.
Speaker 2 (10:38):
Everything we've heard so far.
Speaker 10 (10:39):
She substantiates, but she does this in a very wild,
sort of super colorful way that I think for some
of the jurors maybe made their head spin a bit.
And there is this basic question about she almost seems
to have experienced the sex itself as sort of surreal.
Yet a year in sues where she continues to be
(11:01):
in touch with him, and she says the ultimate nda
she wanted to enter into because she was afraid, based
on an encounter in a parking lot, that Trump was
trying to actually silence her, and she wanted him out.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Of the picture as well.
Speaker 10 (11:19):
She disclaimed money having anything really to do with it.
My basic feeling is like, Wow, this is a colorful,
maybe hyper colorful witness.
Speaker 9 (11:28):
But how much was the jury also watching Donald Trump
and maybe his reaction.
Speaker 2 (11:34):
To some of those very.
Speaker 9 (11:39):
Just let's say, details of that sexual encounter, right.
Speaker 10 (11:44):
So I looked for that pretty carefully. It was mainly
on Stormy they were taking her in. I was looking
at Trumps some and he had a general kind of impassiveness,
not glowering exactly, but obviously not happy. But the basic
dynamic was jury to Stormy. And then again, I haven't
(12:06):
seen Mayr chun this in this trial be so sort
of irritated, and it came across I think as being
irritated with her level of detail.
Speaker 2 (12:16):
That's something if.
Speaker 10 (12:17):
You're the DA you're worried about because you don't want
them to think that he the judge is actually I'm
displeased in any way with the witness.
Speaker 1 (12:27):
You listen to that report and they're basically saying it's
a dumpster fire. Now there's also an obsession by the
media to put Trump in jail, and that's what the
left is fantasizing over right now. They want to get
him in jail. I want you to hear what they
had to say on the view about the idea of
Trump being behind bars.
Speaker 11 (12:47):
I'm sort of conflicted about whether or not he should
be held in contempt and put in He's already been
held in contempt, but put in jail for it. But
I do think that seventy one percent of Americans have
said that he should be put in jail if he
is convicted. The other thing, I will say, we all
saw many of us are old enough to have seen
the OJ case. I remember how Judge Ito lost complete
control of the courtroom, and I think that had a
(13:09):
lot to do with the win. You cannot let Donald
Trump be a runaway train in that courtroom. No, it's
not his courtroom, it's the judge's courtroom. And so I
think that make a point to prove a point. Put
him in a clink.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
Oh why not put him?
Speaker 5 (13:27):
Oh?
Speaker 6 (13:30):
I don't want this to sound like I'm doing wishful thinking. Yes,
but which prison would be best?
Speaker 2 (13:38):
I give you, Michael, Well.
Speaker 9 (13:41):
That's what i've That's what I have from number one.
Speaker 12 (13:44):
Cha.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
But you know, I'm okay.
Speaker 6 (13:48):
If he goes to Alcatraz and they reopened it, maybe.
Speaker 2 (13:53):
You know what about one time obank?
Speaker 11 (13:57):
Okay, y'all, that'd be close to mari A Lago, Milania
can come and visit, that's right.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
What about supermax?
Speaker 11 (14:05):
Supermax would be into to tell Chappo was a Supermax
he you know, pan now he wants to be with
the get people.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
Come on.
Speaker 6 (14:13):
So these are my suggestions.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
What anybody wants to know. Actually, I want to be clear.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
ABC News is paying these people on the View, including
Whoopy Goldberg, to fantasize about Donald Trump going to Guantanamo Bay,
where the mastermind of nine to eleven, Khalid Sheik Mohammad
is can can you just let that sinc in? And
(14:45):
and they're laughing about it. This is a political witch
hunt on a level we've never seen before in this country.
Caitlin Collins, by the way at CNN mocking the President
of the United States of America saying he's afraid of jail.
He doesn't want to go to jail. Listen to this.
Speaker 8 (15:01):
Violation of the gag order since then, and my sense
is he probably won't.
Speaker 13 (15:05):
I just want to read more of what the judge
actually said to Trump today. He said, mister Trump, it's
important to understand the last thing I want to do
is put you in jail. You're the former president of
the United States and possibly the next president as well.
There are many reasons why incarceration is truly a last resort.
For me to take that step would be disruptive and
to these proceedings, which I imagine you want to end
as quickly as possible, just politically Caitlin.
Speaker 2 (15:30):
What would this mean.
Speaker 12 (15:33):
I mean, the argument is that Trump would relish it
in the sense that he would be able to argue
what he's been arguing every day outside that courtroom, that
he is being politically persecuted here, that he can't use
his First Amendment ride he can't speak freely, that this
is protected political speech. The idea that Donald Trump actually
would want to go to jail is ridiculous. Anyone who
knows him knows that he doesn't even like to stay
(15:55):
in a hotel when he goes on foreign trips. When
he went as president, it was a whole thing to
actually get him to stay over night in places. So
this idea that he actually does want to do this
For the optics perspective, I mean, when you speak to
his closest advisors, they'll allies. They'll say that's completely far fetched.
They do they think it would work to their advantage,
maybe politically, But I do think Donald Trump heating this
(16:16):
is something that you never see Donald Trump do, which
is actually watching his words, and he keeps acknowledging that
every time he goes into that courtroom, even if he
is lying about what the gag order actually says, he
can and cannot do. He is being careful. And he
did the same thing after the Egen Carroll verdict came
out where he was found to have defamed her and
it was going to cost him a lot of money.
He changed the way that he would speak publicly about.
Speaker 14 (16:38):
Her until until he defended her with you in your
in your town hall, and then she ended up bringing
him back to court over that incident.
Speaker 1 (16:47):
I love how at the very end they're like except
you're lying, Like her own colleague is like, no, that's
not what happened with Donald Trump, and you should know
it because it was during your interview that that's not
what he did.
Speaker 2 (17:01):
Leave it to CNN, So you.
Speaker 1 (17:04):
Got them fantasizing about Trump going to jail and get
mo or algatraz.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
This is insane. It's absolutely insane. It is insane.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
One of the guests this morning, Trekowski Kati Turkowski, said
Trump's Hushmanny trial is a coordinated effort.
Speaker 2 (17:25):
She described it for sure, saying this is all a ruse.
Speaker 15 (17:29):
And the big story that Fox News had now with
teams at Ma Chlangelo, who.
Speaker 2 (17:33):
Is leading the prosecution.
Speaker 15 (17:34):
He left a great job with the Biden administration Department
of Justice to take this crappy job in New York,
and now it turns out that he has been paid
in the past by the DNC. Do you think the
data is significant or does it for the four to
five President Trump's opinion that somehow the Democratic Party is
behind this?
Speaker 16 (17:53):
Well, I think for Colangelo's purposes, this is very personal.
He obviously has been obsessed with getting Trump. He came
to this office to pursue this prosecution that nobody else
wanted to pursue. The Fence didn't want to pursue this,
the DA's office here in Manhattan did not want to
pursue this. So this is a coordinated effort for sure.
And I think a lot of people see that it
is political.
Speaker 15 (18:11):
And he worked for of tissue James too right, and
the judge donated to Joe Biden. But of course when
the president Knight's former president United States says, real Button's
behind it, they go, there's no proof of them.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
You look at this, It is a coordinated effort. Every
bit of this is coordinated. Every ounce of this was
premeditated by them, and that is that. I think the
biggest problem here that the prosecution is going to have
is that Donald Trump has been so clear and as
(18:45):
it was described this warning, there's still not enough meat
on these bones, like there just isn't. There's not enough
meat on the bones to convict him of doing something
like this. Claire mccaskell talking with former White House Press
secretary about what's happening here with the hush money case,
and I want you to hear what she said. And
(19:05):
again media is still trying to sell this to you
that this matters these.
Speaker 14 (19:09):
Dates today and I was thinking to myself, like so
many moments, we need to remind people, this is not normal.
You have been in the Oval Office, you are a
former senator, you're a former prosecutor.
Speaker 9 (19:19):
Talk to me about what you have heard about what
he was.
Speaker 14 (19:23):
Doing from the Oval Office, well, managing the presidency. How
crazy is this to you?
Speaker 6 (19:28):
Well, you know, this goes out of the categories where
two numb. We have taken in so much of not
normal that all of a sudden we aren't focused as
we should be on how he abused the solemnity of
that office. If somebody would have when I would have
time with my friend the former President Obama, we would
(19:52):
even go back into the dining room or sometimes into
his smaller office, if we were going to really talk
casually because there was such respect around the Oval and
what it was a symbol. It was a symbol. Now
you think about if I would have mentioned to President Obama,
imagine that they're going to have an episode of Zeque
(20:13):
where the president is signing checks to pay off a
lawyer who gave hush money to a porn store. You
know what the President Obama would have said, Claire, your
imagination has gone crazy. Now have never happened in the
United States of America. No, Jen, I want to talk
about January eleventh, twenty seventeen.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
By the way, can we just chat for one moment
about Claire mccaskell here in the part that makes me
laugh the most about what she just said, she acts
like the Oval Office is this amazing place that these
actions are beneath the presidency? Can we remind them of
Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky in the Intern hookup? Wasn't
(20:56):
that the Oval Office? Wasn't that the Oval Office? You
guys are Oh, there's so many things that we would
not say, right, There's so many things that we would
have said differently. There's so many things that we would
have done differently. There's so many things that would have
been We would have changed right, We would have changed it.
(21:16):
I tell you, we would have changed it so many things,
so many things. This guy in the Oval office was
hooking up with an intern, and they act like it's
such a place of reverency. You gotta laugh. I mean,
I'm sorry, you have to laugh at this. I want
to play for you real quick what Donald Trump said
(21:39):
before he walked into the courthouse. And the reason why
is because there's two points here. One yay talks about
the fact that this judge has found him in contempt
for the tenth time. It's ten thousand dollars total and
fines a thousand freach charge, and now the judge saying, hey,
I'm gonna put you in jail, and I want you
to listen to Trump and how he reached bonds that
(22:00):
first off. But the second thing I want you to
notice is how quickly he pivots and goes back to
the issues. For example, the Columbia University just canceled their commencement,
and he says that shouldn't have happened, like this is
unfair to the students, all because the radical extremists on
the left and there's a focus part here that I
love about Trump, Like, yes, he's being clearly there's election
(22:23):
interference going on, like that is so clear, but he's
still staying focused on the issues for the American people
at the very same time. Take a listen to Trump
as he's walking into the court.
Speaker 17 (22:37):
This is the first question, as you know, they've taken
away my constitutional right, so I'm not allowed to answer
to that question. This has never happened in this country before.
It's a ridiculous thing. It's a ridiculous case.
Speaker 6 (22:50):
I did nothing.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
Wrong, absolutely nothing wrong.
Speaker 18 (22:53):
I take a look at Greg Jared this morning, he
went on, take a look at.
Speaker 17 (22:57):
Andrew McCartney or Jonathan Journally or ankle who.
Speaker 18 (23:01):
It's like they say, there's no case here, and yet
the judges gagged me, and I'm not allowed to talk
about I guess his total conflict. The judge is totally
confident it could be conflicted, and you ought to take
a look at it. And I'm not supposed to be
talking about it, but I am allowed to say that
(23:22):
the judge is a conflict that like nobody's ever happy
for you to take a look at it. He's taken
away my constitutional right to speak. I was in Miami
this weekend and reported the rescue me questions the same
questions like you're asking me and I have to say
I have a gaggle or I can't speak about it.
Never happened before ever. Number one. Number two, it's a
(23:43):
fake trial. They have no case, and it's been absolutely
proven now that no case whatsoever. This is Alvin Bragg
doing it for political reasons for Biden. This is a
biiten trial. He's a crooked president. Now, it just came
out Almia just canceled their commentional axioms. Columbia just canceled
(24:04):
their commensal.
Speaker 14 (24:05):
That shouldn't happen.
Speaker 18 (24:07):
And it also came out that the protesters, many of
the protesters are backed by Biden's donors. Okay, are you
listening Israel? I hope you're listening Israel, Hope you're getting smarter.
But they're back by Biden donors. That's where the money's
coming from. And I'm not surprised at all. There's many
(24:28):
other articles, many of them having to do with the
gag order, the unconstitutionality of having to do with the
gag order, and it is unconstitutional and it shouldn't be allowed.
And I wish people could prove a little bit quicker
the appellent courts, because the whole world is watching this
and they see what's happening. More importantly, Franklin, they have
(24:49):
no case, they have absolutely no case. It's a political hopes,
it's election interference. Anything they can do, and even the
witnesses they want to bring up the nothing to do
with the case. This is a ridiculous situation and he's
not fair, not.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Fair, but we will, like thank you, but we will fight.
Speaker 1 (25:09):
You can hear the President going back to that and saying, look,
we still have business here that we got to deal with.
We still have a country in essence to save, and
so I'm going to tell you what's going on, but
I'm also going to move on now. All of this
is happening, by the way, right now, while there's something
else that the Democrats are going to have to deal with,
this reality. The judge and brag and everyone involved in
(25:33):
this case, they say there's nothing political here. A right,
they're lying, and I think most Americans have figured that out.
Like they're lying, that's number one. But if you're gonna
hold the line here that this is real and something
that was supposed to happen, and it was something that
we needed to happen. If that's the line, then don't
(25:53):
you have to put Trump in jail if he violates
it yet again, which I have no do he's going
to and then you got to stick by that. But
then there's Democrats that are going to say, wow, no, no, no,
just find him again, right, just just just find him again.
Don't don't put him in jail because that will be
the biggest backfire we've ever seen. So if you don't
(26:17):
put Trump in jail at this point, then it doesn't
that speak to just how political this whole entire witch
hunt actually is. That you are willing to arrest him,
You're willing to try to ruin his life, You're you're
willing to go to trial over charges that Alvin Bragg
said he would bring if he gets elected and.
Speaker 2 (26:37):
Is raising money off of that.
Speaker 1 (26:39):
The federal government wouldn't even take the case because they
said that there was no evidence that a crime was
committed here. And then you do this the way that
they did it in court basically the second go round,
so it's not federal charges, and they say.
Speaker 2 (26:53):
Oh, this isn't political.
Speaker 1 (26:54):
Okay, if it's not political, then you got to put
Trump in jail. And if you don't put him in
jail and you keep finding him one thousand dollars over
and over and over and over again, then you are
admitting by not putting him in jail that this is
in fact political because you're afraid that if you put
him in jail, that it's going to affect the outcome
of the election. Like if you want to see and
(27:16):
they know this, this judge knows this.
Speaker 2 (27:18):
Alvin Bragg has to know this. If you actually locked up.
Speaker 1 (27:22):
Can you imagine seeing a former president of the United
States of America and you want to talk about election
interference putting him in jail?
Speaker 2 (27:31):
Donald Trump in jail.
Speaker 1 (27:32):
There's been word that's been coming out that Donald Trump
or the Secret Service are now planning for actual contingencies
how they would keep a former president safe while in prison,
Like while in prison, and what does that look like.
Speaker 2 (27:47):
You can't put him with the rest of the prison population.
Speaker 1 (27:50):
You're going to have to completely isolate him from everybody
else because your job is to keep the president safe.
So what does it look like if you do this,
and if you do it, the president that the Secret
Service are going to have to be involved in every
step of this. It's not like you just say I'm
putting you in jail and then you walk out the
baylists grab you and they take you back behind the court.
(28:12):
It didn't work that way. But if you want to
see American patriots get angry, put Donald Trump in jail.
And if you don't do it, and he does quote
cross the line again and then you purposely don't put
him in jail after you make this threat, then it
goes back again to proving the point this is all
political from the very beginning. They're what they're wanting to do,
(28:35):
and what they're trying to do is put Donald Trump
in a court room so that Donald Trump can't go
out in campaign. Okay, that's the whole ballgame here, and
they know it, and Trump knows it. And by the way,
Donald Trump is also called for the arrest of Jack Smith,
the special prosecutor, after prosecutors ad met to misleading a
(28:56):
judge on evidence that they tampered with several revelations last
week that the special counsel Jack Smith's team had mishandled
evidence in the trial of former President Trump over his
allegedly criminal mismanagement of classified documents. Trump then went on
social media to demand the case against him be dropped
and that Smith himself be prosecuted instead, saying, quote, it
(29:19):
has always been clear that the documents case is nothing
but an election interference scam concocted by crooked Joe Biden
and deranged Jack Smith and their hacks and thugs.
Speaker 2 (29:32):
That's what he said.
Speaker 1 (29:33):
On Friday, he said, now derange Jack Smith has had
to admit in a filing in front of Judge Cannon
to what I've been saying happened since the illegal raid
on my home at Marlago, that he and his team
committed blatant evidence tampering by mishandling the very boxes they
used as a pretext to bring this fake case. These
(29:54):
deeply illegal actions by the politicized prosecutors mandate that this,
this whole witch hunt to be dropped immediately. He added
in the box's hoaxes MAGA twenty twenty four. He then
put at the end of that post on true Social.
Hours later, Trump returned a true Social account to demand
that Smith be quote arrested, saying, arrest arranged Jack Smith.
(30:19):
He is a criminal based on the fact that there
was evidence tampering going on as a pretext to getting
in and having a raid at mar Lago again. I
hope they put Trump in jail. I mean that because
I think the world will, I think the United States
of America will stand up and say, this is out
of control radicalism by the extreme left. This is a weaponization,
(30:44):
the politicalization of the Justice Department, and people will say
that is a step too far. And by the way,
that's exactly why I think this judge won't do it.
He can threaten it all he once, but this is
why I think he won't actually do it. Make sure
you share this podcast please with your family and friends
so everybody you know get to hear what we're exposing
(31:05):
here every day.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
And I'll see you back here tomorrow
Host
Ben Ferguson
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.