Part 1 of 2
Trump INDICTMENT and WHAT’S NEXT
Legal AF MeidasTouch
Streamed live 22 hours ago Legal AF Podcast - Full Episodes
6/10/23
The top-rated legal and political podcast Legal AF is back for another hard-hitting look at the most consequential developments at the intersection of law and politics. On this special edition, all three Legal AF anchors, Ben Meiselas, Michael Popok and Karen Friedman Agnifilo, join together to discuss the historic 37 count criminal federal indictment of Donald Trump for violations of the Espionage Act and for conspiracy to obstruct justice, among other things and what happens next including the arraignment next week, and so much more.
Transcript
0:00
foreign [Music] has been criminally indicted for his
0:06
willful retention of National Defense information false statements conspiracy
0:14
and obstruction of justice in federal court in the southern district of
0:20
Florida by a grand jury there in a powerful detailed speaking indictment
0:27
with 38 criminal counts special counsel Jack Smith lays out the case against
0:35
criminal defendant Donald Trump and his criminal code defendant and personal
0:41
aide Walt nauta the criminal indictment contains photographs of boxes with
0:48
highly classified information in bathrooms on the floor in auditoriums
0:55
all totally unsecured the indictment contains text messages from from Trump's
1:01
employees like Walton out to end others showing Donald Trump was directly
1:07
involved at every step in trying to deceive the FBI and the Department of
1:13
Justice by trying to keep these classified records the indictment also
1:19
includes underwrote testimony from Witnesses against Donald Trump and It
1:24
quotes audio recordings of Donald Trump showing classified documents to people
1:30
and bragging about it Donald Trump will be criminally arraigned in a Miami
1:35
Federal Courthouse this Tuesday and already Donald Trump and groups like The
1:42
Proud boys and other right-wing extremists are trying to incite violence
1:47
in front of the courthouse meanwhile Donald Trump's lawyers Jim trustee and
1:53
John Rowley who led his legal defense in connection with special counsel Jack
1:58
Smith's criminal investigation into Trump's theft of these government records have officially left the legal
2:06
team but get this the case against Donald Trump has been randomly assigned to
2:13
disgraced federal judge Eileen cannon from the southern district of Florida a
2:18
2020 Trump appointee who we all know because she was previously reprimanded
2:24
by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals not once but twice for improperly asserting
2:31
jurisdiction for Donald Trump over the department of Justice's search warrant executed at Mar-A-Lago last year we will
2:39
break down all aspects of this criminal indictment and what happens next also
2:45
let's not forget that special counsel Jack Smith has another criminal investigation still taking place of
2:52
Donald Trump relating to the January 6th Insurrection and Donald Trump's attempt
2:58
to overthrow our government and destroy our democracy and Jack Smith is moving
3:03
closer to another criminal indictment in that matter on Friday the federal judge
3:10
presiding over that grand jury in Washington D.C partially unsealed his
3:15
order from March when he compelled former vice president Mike Pence to
3:21
testify before the grand jurian when you read this order it also shows how very
3:28
very damaging the evidence is against Donald Trump in that matter a historic
3:34
episode of legal AF and no other way to do this when with both co-hosts Michael
3:40
popock and Karen Friedman agnifolo how you doing both popock how are you doing
3:45
I'm doing I'm doing great Proud to be an attorney an American
3:51
a patriot at a part of the justice system in my own way and here with you
3:56
and Karen um to unpack it all we've done it in hot ticks kind of on the fly but this is our
4:02
first opportunity together to analyze what's happened talk about things that are agitating our listeners
4:09
and followers hopefully give them some remedy some bomb for that and then talk about what's going to happen next with
4:15
Tuesday's arraignment hi Karen Karen how are you I'm good thanks for letting me join
4:21
I'm excited about it always not only is it an honor when you join but it is it
4:28
adds extra Delight to these uh weekend legal AFS when the gang is all here together but let's dive right into it
4:36
first let's talk about what this indictment is when we learned about it
4:42
what the various accounts are 38 counts what the charges are let's just break
4:50
down Michael popock what is actually in this indictment I laid out in very broad
4:55
terms what's in there but let me pass it to you great I'll do that then and um
5:01
secondly I do want to address the elephant in the room no pun intended with the GOP Eileen Cannon being
5:08
assigned I have a different theory about what may happen on Tuesday and I will share it and analyze it here but I'll
5:14
tease that but let's get back to what you asked me um I'm going to give two two keys key e
5:19
k e y that people can use when they read disintitement we of course have posted it all over and we'll talk about it at
5:25
length today there are 37 counts against Donald Trump
5:30
and and including some with that he shares with Walt nauta his valet Butler
5:36
body man it depends on what era you grew up uh that was his role from uh from the
5:42
White House all the way forward forward to Mar-A-Lago and uh one count alone against Walt NADA for false statement
5:49
that gives us a total of 38. the easiest way to group it is of course the way the
5:54
government has grouped it 31 of those counts are for individual violations of
6:01
the Espionage Act document by document by document that's why there's 31 of
6:06
them so there's a list here that we're showing on the screen from the chart within the complaint that shows the 31
6:13
times at least based on current knowledge to the Department of Justice and the grand jury of times when the
6:20
Espionage Act Donald Trump using secreting not returning
6:27
transmitting National Defense information ndi which includes as a
6:34
subset classified and top secret and the highest levels of National Security
6:39
documents that this country owns and possesses including nuclear
6:44
the the fighting capacity of our adversaries and of our allies things
6:50
that if any of those pieces of paper found their way out of the bathroom Ballroom storage room or any other
6:57
semi-public area of Mar-A-Lago or Bedminster or the airplane or the SUV
7:03
all or all the people's hands who touched it who aren't qualified or to
7:08
have classified uh top secret information this country would be imperiled that is
7:14
the gravaman the foundation of this complaint and think about how many people there's 150 people or more that
7:21
work at Mar-A-Lago there's another dozens and dozens that work at Bedminster we know what we know we know
7:28
what was returned forcibly by execution of search warrant and subpoena and a little bit that was
7:35
dribbled back by Donald Trump to the National Archive back at the very beginning we don't need we don't even know what's missing we don't know there
7:42
has to be a working hypothesis that there are documents that are no longer within the care custody and control of
7:48
even Donald Trump because of the way he carelessly maintained these documents so
7:54
that's the breakdown of the 38 it goes across eight different Federal statutes but I'll give you the big picture on
8:00
them you've got um conspiracy to obstruct Justice which
8:06
is what we always thought this was going to be an obstruction case we talked about frequently in legal AF and this
8:11
was going to be a uh Espionage Act case we've been talking about that since day one both those counts are there both
8:18
those counts are shared um uh well the conspiracy count is
8:23
shared with Walt nauda he's a co-defendant in that one the um Espionage Act is right now just
8:30
against Donald Trump himself then you've got various counts that sound the same but arise under different
8:37
Federal statutes concealing documents a
8:42
conspiracy to conceal documents a scheme to conceal documents uh and then you
8:48
have the stuff related to false statement both the false so what are the false statements for Donald Trump it is
8:54
his efforts to allow uh because he misled his lawyers on purpose Corcoran
9:02
and we'll talk about Corcoran and Bob who's certified under penalty of perjury on June the second 2022 before the
9:10
execution of the search warrant that they had done a diligent search when Trump knew or should have known
9:16
that at least 30 boxes that he directed be taken out of the storage room
9:22
remained in his personal Residence at Mar-A-Lago therefore could not have been searched by uh Corcoran prior to his
9:29
meeting with the FBI Trump didn't want them searched they remained with Donald
9:34
Trump until after the search was completed that Trump allowing them to sign that knowing that they were meeting
9:41
with the government the next day that they needed to comply with the subpoena um that is him also participating in a
9:48
false statement and then you've got the false statements that Walt NADA has made independently and this is you know we
9:53
all speculated the best we could that Walt NADA was in deep trouble because not only do they have him on video and
10:00
that's reflected in the complaint by timestamp moving boxes in and out of the
10:07
um of the White House sorry of mar-a-lago's various locations and always ending up in the personal
10:13
residence section of Mar-A-Lago in the pine Hall which is some sort of hallway in front of the bedrooms in the offices
10:20
that Donald Trump resides in they are at Mar-A-Lago putting Trump right into the
10:25
jackpot he's reviewing the boxes that he's making Trump is making the personal
10:31
decision based on his own personal review about what does spoon feed back to the National Archive at the very
10:37
beginning of this process when only 15 boxes arrived even those had classified documents inside of them and then Trump
10:44
coach his lawyers Corcoran and Halligan we'll talk about Lindsey Halligan in a
10:50
minute to why don't we say that we isn't it better if we tell the government in
10:56
response to the subpoena that there aren't any documents wouldn't that be better and then using examples that he
11:01
thinks come out of the Hillary Clinton server era to to suggest to them their testimony to tamper with them and to and
11:09
to obstruct Justice wouldn't it be better if some of those documents just and then he made a plucking according to
11:15
Evan corcoran's notes which are referenced to the complaint he made a plucking motion just if they just kind
11:21
of disappeared when they were in your hotel room Mr Corcoran it wouldn't that be good or how about that I.T person for
11:28
Hillary Clinton that made a bunch of emails disappear that he didn't get in trouble he's telling that story because
11:34
he's trying to coach his lawyers into obstructing justice with him and Evan
11:39
Corcoran takes it all down in his notes if you're on trying to unlock the key of the complaint Ben and for our audience
11:46
I'll give you some of the names that are obvious attorney number one for Trump is obviously Corcoran who turned over 50
11:53
pages of notes an audio tape of his musings and testified to the grand jury attorney number two has to be Lindsay
12:00
Halligan because Lindsey Halligan was present during the search warrant and during some of the other uh document
12:07
attempted document collection by uh Corcoran and attorney number three has
12:12
to be Christina Bob because she's the one that signed that certification the other fascinating like bombshell there's
12:19
so many I mean you've done a million hot takes on them and I I could too that's in the complaint is that Christina Bob
12:25
without participating at all in the search of even the documents that Donald
12:30
Trump self-selected for Corcoran to look at she didn't even participate in that
12:36
he called Corcoran called her up told her to come over put a form in front of her and she's signed it having not
12:43
looked at the documents and didn't even know there was a subpoena or what was in The subpoena that was
12:48
gobsmacking to me and the other thing there was gobsmacking to me is based on the time stamp
12:55
um Evan Corcoran spent like 35 minutes looking at what was in the storage unit
13:01
in order to find or not find whatever Donald Trump had had placed there for
13:06
him you know this pla this this theater that was going on this Kabuki theater for Donald Trump he spent 35 minutes
13:13
I've been doing this a long time I've gone into a a room full of boxes that I've had a search for Discovery purposes
13:20
or or or because there was a subpoena outstanding and you can't even order your cup of coffee in 30 how do you
13:26
review that picture of documents that we've just put on the screen piled high to the ceiling and wide to the edge of
13:33
the room in 35 minutes but he did because that's what it said he came in and came out and have the timestamp for
13:38
that so you have you have all of that the other uh person that is you can kind of piece
13:44
together is the is is there's two instances that are referenced that we talked about on legal AF where
13:51
highly compartmented sense sensitive information including What's called the five eyes meaning only five of our
13:58
allies Canada Australia us and two others can look at New Zealand can look
14:04
at this material it's called five eyes material he was showing five eyes material Donald Trump at Bedminster
14:10
because he secreted documents and boxes through Walt now to got them to Bedminster on his plane and then was
14:17
showing them off to people including Taylor budowich who just testified earlier in
14:24
the week in Miami at the Grand Jury that's the guy who's member of the pack
14:29
that got shown at least one of those war maps or or uh or or War planning
14:35
documents that is another violation under the 38 other the you know the 1-31
14:40
counts of Espionage Act that is cited that is is ridiculous and then lastly
14:46
there's even a little I think a little warning not only to the
14:51
people who are like Walton outa around Trump who have not come forward to to
14:57
cooperate with the government they could be next in being indicted but you have a reference it has to be to Melania Trump
15:04
within the document now they could have left it out because it doesn't really it
15:09
doesn't really move the ball ahead in terms of the crimes that are being alleged but there is a reference we put
15:16
up up on the screen there's only one female member of his family that would
15:21
be responsible for moving from house to house and that's Melania it's not the
15:26
daughters it's not anybody else it's Melania and you can tell from the way this this is written and sort of not
15:33
English as a first language type language that she's telling Walt nouda there's no room on the plane to
15:39
Bedminster for all the boxes that Donald Trump wants to take with him to get them
15:44
away from Mar-A-Lago and the prying eyes of the FBI and the Department of Justice
15:49
that's Melania why is it in there because they're sending a shot across the bout of Donald Trump that says
15:55
nobody is safe we've got text messages we've got emails we've got video we've
16:01
got testimony we got it all and if you don't play ball with us and if you think
16:06
we're not serious we're putting your wife in there as well that's my takeaway from where we're at I want to do one
16:13
thing in Eileen Cannon because I have a different View and I just want to give people a little bit of
16:18
I know that this is an agitating issue that she got quote unquote assigned to this I'm not sure that's going to happen
16:26
on Tuesday and I'm not sure she's the permanent judge I'll tell you why first of all here time for the pope quarter
16:32
board first of all the chief judge of Miami is altanaga her Chief magistrate
16:38
is Torres Torres opened the unsealed the
16:43
indictment not Bruce Reinhardt who's listed on the complaint on the on the
16:48
indictment as being the Magistrate Judge you see up top right it says Reinhardt but Reinhardt it sits in West Palm Beach
16:54
and he did not unseal Torres unsealed the clerk stamp on the top right corner
17:01
is the clerk Madam Clerk of the Miami court so yes I understand that there was
17:07
a grand jury that may have been West Palm Beach based that ended up in Miami for coveted reasons but all signs so far
17:13
point to Miami and then finally Canon's magistrate when she sits in Miami because these judges sort of run the
17:20
circuit they run the southern district from Fort Pierce down to Miami is not Torres her magistrate when she's in
17:27
Miami is otatso Reyes and so far that person's not involved so I am not yet on
17:34
board with all the reporting that it's definitely Eileen Cannon because her name is listed at the top we're going to
17:40
see on Tuesday yes there's a random wheel selection in in the southern district
17:46
um so people are like how could it be there's 15 and plus senior judges how could that possibly be I'm not sure it
17:52
is and then the chief judge is permitted under the local administrative orders of
17:57
the southern district to change the trial judge if she so fits if she's if
18:03
she sees fit so Alta Naga can change her out by Tuesday or thereafter and if the
18:08
Department of Justice doesn't like Canon and it really is Canon on Tuesday they file either Canon recuses herself which
18:15
she is required to do if she believes there's an appearance of impropriety or bias based on her prior rulings When
18:22
Donald Trump ran to her courtroom to get uh to stop the Mar-A-Lago investigation in its tracks and their 11th circuits
18:29
slapping her back I think she recuses if she doesn't recuse they can file a motion It ultimately goes up to the 11th
18:36
circuit and the 11th circuit decides which judge presides over this case having said all that I don't think at
18:41
the end of the day Eileen Cannon is going to be the presiding judge for the trial of Donald Trump I have my own
18:47
thoughts that I want to share about Eileen Canon which is similar but
18:52
um slightly different but I think it will still be very reassuring to all of
18:58
our viewers out there that I'm ultimately not worried about that assignment I also want to talk about
19:04
some of my views within the indictment but I really want to get your
19:10
perspective Karen Friedman agnifolo you were the former number two at the Manhattan District Attorney's office as
19:17
a former prosecutor you've prepared indictments at the state level but you
19:23
know the process you've worked with special counsel Jack Smith before from the very outset when special counsel
19:30
Jack Smith was announced as the special counsel from the very very very first
19:36
moment you were here on the Mindless touch Network I remember that day in November very vividly because a lot of
19:43
the public had no clue who this guy was a lot of the large media networks were
19:49
basically trashing this guy and you came on and you said I've worked with special
19:54
counsel Jack Smith he is one of the most diligent prosecutors there is and if he
20:00
is getting on this case then this is very very serious and Karen you were
20:05
right I want to get your thoughts on this indictment but first let's take a quick break your pet's a member of the
20:12
family my Lily certainly is don't feed them like they're in the doghouse give them nom nom Nom Nom delivers fresh dog
20:19
food with every portion personalized to your dog's needs so you can bring out their best gnome gnomes made with real
20:27
whole food you can see and recognize without any additives or fillers that contribute to bloating and low energy
20:32
that's because Nom Nom uses the latest science and insights to make real good
20:38
food for your dogs their nutrient pack recipes are crafted by board certified veterinary nutritionists made fresh and
20:46
shipped free to your door Nom Noms already delivered over 40 million meals to good dogs like yours
20:53
inspiring millions of clean bowls and tail wags I love my dog so much and feel
20:58
better giving her better nutrition and my dog loves the food and other benefits they've seen plus Nom Nom comes with a
21:04
money back guarantee if your dog's tail isn't wagging within 30 days gnome will
21:09
refund your first order no fillers No Nonsense just Nom Nom go right now for
21:15
50 off your no risk two-week trial at trinom.com legal AF spell Try n o m.com
21:23
slash legal AF for 50 off try gnome.com legal AF our next partner is athletic
21:29
greens my family and I take ag1 by athletic greens literally every day I
21:35
gave ag1 a try because I wanted better gut health boosted energy immune system support and wanted a supplement that
21:42
actually tastes great I take ag1 in the morning before starting my day and it makes me feel
21:47
Unstoppable and ready to take on anything I'm doing something good for my
21:52
body giving my body the nutrition it craves and covering my nutritional basis I've tried a ton of different
21:58
supplements out there but this is different and the ingredients are super high quality
22:03
very quickly after using ag1 I noticed that it improved my energy and made me feel great ag1 makes it easier for you
22:11
to take the highest quality supplements period just one daily serving covers my day's nutritional basis and supports my
22:18
long-term gut health with 75 high quality vitamins minerals and Whole Food sourced ingredients it's one scoop of
22:25
powder mixed with water once a day ag1 is a really seamless and easy daily Habit to maintain
22:31
I'm asked all the time about the one thing I do to take care of my health if I could only pick one and this is it ag1
22:38
by athletic greens I can't think of another daily routine that pays off as well as ag-1 which is why I trust the
22:45
product so much if you're looking for a simpler cost effective supplement routine athletic greens is giving you a
22:51
free one-year supply of vitamin D and five free travel packs with your first purchase go to athleticgreens.com Legal
22:59
AF that's athleticgreens.com legal AF check it out welcome back we are live here on legal
23:07
AF a historic Edition Donald Trump indicted by a grand jury in the southern
23:14
district of Florida uh in the first segment we heard Michael popock's take
23:19
on the uh criminal indictment and now I want to hear from Karen Friedman agnifolo former prosecutor number two at
23:28
the Manhattan District Attorney's Office you've prepared very very serious indictments you've been in the room
23:34
working with top prosecutors prepared documents just like this in fact you've
23:40
worked before with special counsel Jack Smith before he was a special counsel back when he was a prosecutor in the
23:48
office where you work so Karen Friedman agnifolo your thoughts yeah so
23:54
so indictment I want to just talk about some overall observations so first of
23:59
all this is what's called a speaking indictment or a talking indictment which is different than a Bare Bones indictment which is the other type of
24:06
indictment which the more usual kind of indictment if you recall Alvin Bragg when he brought his case against Donald
24:12
Trump uh that was a Bare Bones indictment that just lists the legal language on or about this date at this
24:19
location the defendant committed the crime of falsifying a business record and they really Bare Bones indictments
24:26
are what they typically look like it's just to inform you of the charges but there is a a tool that prosecutors use
24:32
sometimes which is called a speaking indictment or a talking indictment and that's usually when the charge is either
24:39
conspiracy which there are conspiracy charges in this indictment or if there's a RICO or racketeering charge which is
24:47
the type of indictment that we know funny Willis is considering bringing down in Fulton County Georgia so I would
24:54
expect that there would would be a speaking indictment there and a speaking indictment all it is is a story you're
25:01
telling the story of the crime and of the defendants and of the what's
25:07
happening there and this story that uh that Jack Smith told you can tell it was
25:14
written so that anyone can understand it so that the American public can
25:19
understand it a court can understand it and a defendant can understand it and it's it's what's required in a
25:26
conspiracy uh indictment you have to spell out the conspiracy and the
25:31
agreement and all of that but but Jack Smith did this in a way so that there was a coherent story that anyone could
25:39
understand and that's because this is such a historic indictment you know indicting the former president of the
25:46
United States for for violating the laws he sort of uphold to indict a former
25:53
president and charge him with obstructing the very agencies that he used to lead and to indict the former
25:59
commander-in-chief and charge him with endangering our national security by violating the Espionage Act I mean there
26:07
is no more serious accusation you can make and so this is such a significant
26:13
indictment because of what it is doing that in order to sell this indictment to
26:19
the American people Jack Smith had to write this in a way that really
26:25
Justified it it's more this indictment is more than just these are the charges and what he's charged with this
26:31
indictment is a story and it's a justification for why this indictment is so significant and why Trump's conduct
26:38
was was not at all like The Accidental possession of classified or national
26:45
security information the way um you know Hillary Clinton's server or the way Pence uh found some and Biden
26:53
found some those were accidental uh possessions all of them unintentional
26:58
and so what happened when they found them they discovered them they gave them back and I think that's significant
27:04
because that's another thing Jack Smith puts in his indictment is all the efforts that the Department of Justice
27:10
made to try and get the documents back had Donald Trump just said oh here I
27:16
didn't realize I had them here they are and give them back this indictment would never have occurred this we would never
27:23
have him be charged but this isn't just about possession this is about him
27:28
thinking that he's Above the Law and nothing no laws apply to him and he can
27:35
do whatever he wants you know the one thing that wasn't in the indictment that
27:40
struck me was motive their motive isn't required to prove these cases you know and motive is is
27:47
why why did someone do it and and we know that Jack Smith was looking into whether he had whether Trump had uh
27:54
business dealings in the countries where um where these the the
28:00
um documents pertained to and so that was not in here now that doesn't mean
28:06
that that doesn't exist it just means that Jack Smith wasn't able to uh to
28:12
prove that or to get that information in time for the indictment or maybe it
28:17
didn't happen at all so we don't know what the motive is and and you know I I was reading uh I was reading um an
28:24
interview that someone gave who knows Trump well and said he thought that he
28:31
kept this stuff as a trophy so he can you know he he thinks he won the election and you know he still thinks
28:38
he's president and so he still thinks he can keep these and use them to show people that he can do whatever he wants
28:43
but who knows motive wasn't in there and it doesn't have to be proven but that was the one thing that I noticed that
28:50
was missing that frankly could help with the court of public opinion and persuading people that this is a
28:57
righteous prosecution now Jack Smith when he brought this case
29:03
you know there was a lot of chatter that this was going to be in DC and the reason that's the case was
29:09
there were aspects of this crime that happened in Washington DC right there was he was president in in Washington
29:15
and these documents existed in Washington and they had to be taken from Washington to be brought to the various
29:20
locations whether it's Florida or the or the ones in in Bedminster that that are in the indictment and we know that there
29:27
was a grand jury in uh in Washington not because the justice department or
29:32
anybody leaked it necessarily but because Witnesses were called to testify and and defense attorneys you know a lot
29:39
of the witnesses had defense attorneys or attorneys and so people talk and there were reporters stationed outside
29:44
and would know who went in and and so you could tell that there was activity going on in the Washington grand jury
29:50
and then at some point towards the end and we know we were at the end of the presentation because of the types of
29:57
witnesses who were being called and the types of Cooperators you know they move
30:02
up the chain of command uh in order of of importance and you could tell who where they were based on the types of
30:09
witnesses that they were getting getting to and again we know that largely because attorneys we think leaked this
30:17
information not you know not the attorneys at the justice department but attorneys representing the witnesses who
30:23
went in to testify and so we knew we were at the end and that's what all the
30:28
experts were be could you know you can sort of read the tea leaves and say okay based on what's Happening Now we can
30:34
tell we're sort of near the end and turns out uh people were right because it's it's fairly
30:39
um it's not that complicated to understand when you put all the puzzle pieces together and so and so we knew we
30:46
were at the end and then all of a sudden everything stopped and at that point I
30:51
had surmised at least in my mind I thought well I think that's um that's when uh he's uh Jack Smith is talking to
30:57
Merrick Garland that's when he's presenting his recommendations and his prosecution memo and that was just a
31:02
guess but that's what I was thinking and at towards the end when uh on Wednesday
31:08
when we had legal AF um popoc and I were going back and forth because a lot of people were saying is this going to be
31:14
in DC or is this going to be in Florida don't forget at that point uh there was there was information that
31:20
this case uh was also being presented in Florida and one of the things we discussed and that I posited was I think
31:27
this whole thing is going to be in Florida and not in Washington for the following reasons
31:32
getting a trial if you're Jack Smith getting any trial going before the
31:37
presidential election is is what you want that is the goal you want this case to go to trial because we know Donald
31:44
Trump will never plead guilty that will never ever happen so you want a trial and the only chance you have at going to
31:51
trial because we know Donald Trump's number one trial strategy is what he does everywhere is to try to create
31:57
delay and how do you create delay in a federal criminal trial you make motions
32:03
you make legal arguments and you you make arguments that you think you want
32:09
the judge to rule on and then if the judge doesn't rule your way you know Trump what does he do he appeals it and
32:14
then what does he go from there he appeals it to the Supreme Court of the United States and so what does that do
32:19
all of that takes time because Donald Trump does not want a trial he doesn't want a trial in DC he doesn't want a
32:25
trial in Florida he doesn't want to trial anywhere because a trial will expose all of this evidence in excrucia
32:32
creating detail and it will risk him being a convicted felon the first in our
32:37
nation's history so his goal will be to delay and the number one problem with
32:42
bringing this case in Washington is something in the law called venue an event the venue is is where do you
32:49
bring the case where does it have to happen and the law says the Paul and the policy says it has to be where the
32:57
Essential Elements of the crime substantially happened and here that is Mar-A-Lago and you can see that now in
33:04
the indictment and so in order to take venue off the table as a legal argument
33:09
because that really is his number one legal argument that that I think has the most would have had the most legs or at
33:16
least the most appellate legs I think he would have ultimately lost but he could at least make the argument and so that
33:22
would have delayed the trial and so if I'm Jack Smith and Merrick Garland I think okay if I take this down to
33:28
Florida it takes a venue off the table and at least I have a chance of a trial and there's depending on how many judges
33:35
were in the mix of who could get this some people say 15 other people say
33:41
fewer because but I don't really know how how Florida works so I defer to popoc and he says uh it's likely there
33:47
were 15 judges in the mix if that's the case I'm thinking if I'm the prosecutor
33:52
there's a 1 in 15 chance it's Eileen Cannon we know she was a disaster so I'm going to take my chances because I want
33:58
to have a trial and of course lo and behold where are we we are in front of Eileen Cannon but I think that's why the
34:05
prosecutor Jack Smith here decided to take it down to Florida and you know look are there going to be
34:11
some Logistics with trying a former president of the United States yes I mean one of them is is assuming fawny
34:18
Willis also brings her case in July and August and Jack brings his January 6th case it's going to be so we know they're
34:25
gonna have to coordinate at least three criminal trials maybe four which one goes first is anybody's guess the
34:31
biggest logistical hurdle though I think in this case is the fact that this trial involves evidence of classified
34:39
documents so on the one hand these are our nation's most uh most top secret
34:45
classified documents and and you know Donald Trump Donald Trump had you know had uh over at
34:54
over 300 documents that had classified markings that we know of and over a
34:59
hundred were recovered during this execution of the search warrant he took
35:05
over 12 000 government documents total but so let's say there were over let's
35:11
say there's either 100 or 300 classified documents that were in play that Jack
35:16
Smith could have used in this indictment he chose 31 of them and one question we
35:22
will all have to ask ourselves is how did he choose those 31 counts and because that's a very careful careful
35:29
thing that prosecutors do when you have lots and lots and lots of evidence you know I remember when when we used to
35:36
when we used to charge uh crimes that had you know you'd recover you know thousands of images of child porn for
35:43
example you wouldn't necessarily you know each one could be its own count you wouldn't necessarily charge a thousand
35:50
counts first of all it bogs down the uh the jury it's a giant indictment and so
35:55
what you do is you carefully select a representative number and so uh he would
36:00
have done that here and the 31 counts that he would have chosen he would have carefully selected and the question is
36:06
why did he pick these documents and you know know one question I have to ask myself is perhaps he chose ones that
36:14
wouldn't endanger our national security If he if these come out in public right
36:22
um for example did he did he work with intelligence professionals and only use
36:27
those that could be used in open court and shown to the jury but that cuts both
36:33
ways because Trump will say see they're not National Security documents the jury sees them you see them the whole world
36:39
sees them right so kind of by their very nature you can't necessarily use the
36:46
most secret ones because they can't possibly be shown to everybody because
36:52
they would endanger our national security and so there or perhaps there's
36:57
another there's another question maybe dot maybe Jack Smith worked with the intelligence Professor professionals to
37:04
say okay if you can get Donald Trump to agree not to show these to the public in the jury you can use them until that
37:11
point but there is something called the classified information procedures act and
37:17
um and and the judge will have to utilize the procedures there they'll have a hearing they call it cepa they'll
37:23
have a sipa hearing to determine uh how and in what capacity these documents can
37:28
be used while still ensuring that Donald Trump receives a fair trial and it's
37:35
complicated though so Jack Smith would have chosen uh these these charges very very carefully when creating this
37:42
indictment and and that's how how these 31 documents got in there
37:50
another couple things just to put some more other thoughts out there to keep in mind
37:55
um to keep in mind about this is you know Jack Smith will have to when he tries this case really keep it simple
38:01
for the jury and it really is a simple case this isn't a complicated case and that's what any prosecutor does is you
38:08
you simplify it so that anyone can understand it and and you have to do it
38:13
in a way that again shows this isn't inadvertent this isn't okay you know Donald Trump is going to say well I can
38:20
declassify things with my mind you know that defense will easily be debunked uh
38:26
and like I said venues off the table which is good and you know Donald Trump has come out and said also the
38:32
presidential records act allows him to possess these documents I guess that's going to be one of his defenses well
38:38
anyone can read the presidential records act it's written in plain English not legalese and it very clearly it says the
38:45
opposite of what he's saying and so the jury will not you know will be sworn to follow the law
38:52
um but you know but Jack Smith has to get this case going and has to get this going quickly because once uh if it has
38:59
to happen before the general election um and hopefully before the the nominating process because otherwise
39:06
they'll have to press pause and it will not get tried if he is elected president
39:11
and of course if a republican wins uh they could pardon him or stop the prosecution
39:17
um these charges are very serious he faces over 400 years in prison if
39:23
convicted of all of them but of course you know people who have been charged with this type of of crime before it
39:29
didn't get anywhere near that but certainly I've never seen a case this serious of somebody who held the highest
39:36
office in the country and swore to uphold the law so so who knows what he will get and
39:43
um and there's just one other thing I want to talk about which is something you know uh I I watched um Ben's hot
39:50
Take On Eileen Cannon and how he's not worried if she is ultimately the judge
39:57
uh so let's talk a little bit about about what is going to happen if she's ultimately the judge and what are some
40:04
of the Mischief rulings she can do in this case so number one as Ben and
40:09
Michael hope both said I can't believe I called you Michael I always just call you popoc but his popock and Ben just
40:14
said it's not clear that she's going to ultimately end up with the case but
40:20
there's a couple of issues with this if she does end up with the case so number
40:25
one uh she could be um for the reasons Ben has talked about in his hot takes and I'm sure we'll
40:31
we'll talk about more here in detail uh there could be an issue that she has to be recused from the case because she has
40:38
already shown um that she's not competent to you know
40:43
to to have the case and I think that um you know I think that she has made a
40:50
couple of rulings in the prior it's a civil case that she had right the there
40:55
was the execution of a search warrant and then she inserted herself in a civil proceeding and appointed a self
41:00
um a special master and was reversed so I think there's a chance that you can bring a like like Ben has said you can
41:07
bring a uh a an action to recuse her from this case because she has shown
41:14
that she's uh biased and not competent to to hear this case so I think there's a good chance of that uh but also like
41:22
say she's not recused from this case and she does take this case you know there is some Mischief she can do and there
41:28
are ruling she first of all she can delay it you know so that it doesn't happen before uh before the election
41:35
which would be potentially fatal to this to this um prosecution
41:40
she could rule for example that the um you know if you were called Barrel Howe
41:46
ruled uh all the attorney-client conversations between
41:52
um between Evan Corcoran and Trump and others and Trump they fall under the crime fraud exception which is why the
41:59
doj got all of that evidence and that testimony well that doesn't that ruling
42:04
doesn't follow it's not the law of the case because that that had that case
42:09
this is a trial judge who can make trial rulings so she can reverse that if she
42:15
wanted now I don't think she will but she can she can create Mischief the
42:20
other possibility is she wants to redeem herself if she keeps this case and suddenly becomes a real judge and wants
42:26
to because she was raked through the coals by the 11th circuit which is the circuit that rules uh her and reversed
42:33
her and and essentially called for Lawless so maybe she wants to redeem herself who knows so there's lots of
42:39
possibilities with with Eileen Cannon but for anyone who says oh a judge just a referee and takes but just calls balls
42:47
and Strikes and you know this is this is um Smith's prosecution there isn't much she can do they're 100 wrong a trial
42:54
judge can make or break a case they can suppress evidence they can rule evidence in admissible important evidence or rule
43:01
other evidence admissible that shouldn't be and a lot of that is not appealable mid-trial you have to wait until appeal
43:07
and if there's an acquittal there's no appeal for Jack Smith so uh let's hope
43:13
and pray that it's not Eileen Cannon I don't trust her I think she's a terrible judge and I think she can harm this case
43:20
significantly and even possibly make it so it not go to trial so whatever anyone can do to
43:27
um to figure out how to get her off I think it'll be uh it'll be the best
43:33
thing for justice um I think uh I think at that at this
43:39
point um that's about all I I the comments I have to say I'm going to bring in my my
43:44
my co-hosts um but I think that's those are my overall observations and comments about
43:50
about this case about this indictment and about this prosecution