Trump launches Truth Social war on new special counsel's wife: Trump and right-wingers claim special counsel Jack Smith's wife shows he can't be impartial by Samaa Khullar Salon Published November 23, 2022 1:29PM (EST)
Librarian's Comment: Adding to Glenn Kirschner's helpful exploration of the implications of taking Trump's argument that he cannot be investigated by Democrats, because he is the archetypal Republican demigod, the only true reactionary right-winger of consequence, the true Alex Jones of politics, the Bloviatorius Maximus, we can apply the argument in a meta-concept, examining its implications for governance at large. The implication is clear: all deliberative, adjudicative and legislative functions would come to a halt, immobilized by the imperative of assuring absolute fairness in the preservation of the right of any partisan to claim either the right to be prosecuted or not to be prosecuted by a person of the same, or a different political affiliation. It wouldn't be fair to Democrats to force them to follow the laws adopted by a Republican Congress, or the executive actions of a President of the opposing party. The very principle of effective self-governance as a cohesive social whole is shown to be based on our willingness to acquiesce to lawful authority, even when it is exercised by partisan officials. And obviously, all Trump-appointed judges would have to recuse themselves from adjudicating any issues affecting Trump, who engineered their appointments. Now that we think of it, perhaps he has a good idea!
Former President Donald Trump raged online after finding out that the wife of the special counsel appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland is a Democratic donor who was involved in a documentary about former first lady Michelle Obama.
Justice Department career prosecutor Jack Smith was appointed by Garland to oversee investigations into Trump with the apparent goal of shielding the department from accusations of partiality.
Katy Chevigny, Smith's wife, was listed as a producer on "Becoming," the former first lady's 2020 documentary. She also donated $2,000 to President Joe Biden's 2020 campaign, according to FEC records.
Trump took to Truth Social to rant about Chevigny and Smith, attaching screenshots of her Tweets supporting the Democratic Party and accusing the Department of Justice of being biased in their investigation
"This is just a small amount of information from the wife of the hard-line Radical Left Special Counsel (prosecutor), an acolyte of Eric Holder and Barack Hussein Obama," he wrote on Tuesday night.
Trump launches Truth Social attack on judge after DOJ releases partial Mar-a-Lago affidavit Eric Trump joined his father on the conservative social media website, attaching a screenshot of Chevigny's producer credit on the Wikipedia page for "Becoming" as proof of a supposed vendetta against the former president.
"The wife of the Special Counsel Biden chose to investigate @realDonaldTrump (his likely opponent in 2024) reportedly produced the Michelle Obama documentary," he wrote. "Yes America, you are reading this correctly."
Conservatives are up in arms over Chevigny's Democratic ties, claiming that Biden is using the Justice Department as a political weapon against Trump, though there are no federal laws that restrict spouses of federal law enforcement agents, prosecutors or other officials from political donations or campaign activity.
"You just can't make this stuff up," tweeted Rep. Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., who infamously likened those who stormed the capitol on Jan. 6 to tourists. "America cannot stand with a corrupt, two-tiered justice system."
Rep. Andrew Clyde @Rep_Clyde You just can’t make this stuff up.
Katy Chevigny, wife of Jack Smith—the special counsel appointed by DOJ to go after President Trump, donated to Joe Biden’s campaign and produced Michelle Obama’s documentary.
America cannot stand with a corrupt, two-tiered justice system. 3:34 PM · Nov 21, 2022
Former Trump spokesperson Taylor Budowich added on Twitter: "No wonder Jack Smith accepted this special assignment…The swamp is hard at work!"
Taylor Budowich @TayFromCA Very interesting… was just told the wife isn’t only a major donor, but also the producer of the gushing Michelle Obama documentary…
No wonder Jack Smith accepted this special assignment…
The swamp is hard at work! MAGA War Room @MAGAIncWarRoom Wow. The wife of special prosecutor Jack Smith was a high dollar donor to Joe Biden's presidential campaign. 2:04 PM · Nov 21, 2022 from Sacramento, CA
"You would think that if the stated purpose to avoid any type of concern about bias were sincere, then they would at least check to see whether or not when you shake the family tree of the special counsel, any virulent Trump haters, Never Trumpers, Biden supporters fall out," Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., said in an interview with Steve Bannon on Tuesday,
Notably, many conservatives did not express the same indignation when Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, wrote to Wisconsin and Arizona lawmakers to overturn the results of the 2020 elections and begged Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows in text messages to not concede.
The former president is currently in the middle of two separate investigations by the Justice Department: one regarding his involvement in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, and another into his keeping classified records from the White House in his Mar-a-Lago home after leaving office.
The Trump Organization, and several Trump family members, are also involved in a civil case involving tax fraud launched by New York Attorney General Letitia James. Trump continues to claim that the various charges brought against him in state and federal court are simply a witch-hunt perpetrated by his political enemies.
Trump’s attack on special counsel’s wife BACKFIRES Brian Tyler Cohen Nov 28, 2022
The Legal Breakdown episode 2 - @GlennKirschner2 discusses Trump's attacks on the special counsel's wife, Mike Pence's refusal to testify for the January 6 Committee, and Congress finally getting access to Trump's tax returns.
Transcript
This is Episode Two of our legal show, now named "The legal breakdown," which I think is aptly named for a few reasons. So with that said, Glenn, let's break it down. Trump has now attacked the wife of special counsel Jack Smith -- her name is Katy Chevigny -- because she's donated in the past to Democrats. So first, what are your thoughts on this? And would you consider it in any way disqualifying for the special counsel?
[Glenn Kirschner] Uh ,you know, so Donald Trump is a one-trick pony, right? When the evidence against him is strong, when he can't defeat the message, what does he do? He goes after the messenger, or maybe the messenger's spouse. Is it disqualifying that a prosecutor has a spouse who has some political affiliation, or is involved in some political activity? The answer is no. Of course not. But we're not surprised that Donald Trump is attacking the family member of a prosecutor, or of a judge, or of an FBI agent, right? We've seen this movie before. But let's think about it. Jack Smith, the newly appointed special counsel, we have learned his wife is involved in Democratic politics. She's apparently donated to political campaigns. She was involved as a producer on a Michelle Obama documentary. So if you take Donald Trump's argument to sort of the logical conclusion, that because the prosecutor's spouse is somehow involved in politics, then Jack Smith cannot investigate, or indict, or prosecute a republican politician. Well, what's the corollary to that ? Well, I guess Jack Smith also can't investigate, indict, or prosecute, a Democrat. Because if you follow Donald Trump's logic, he's likely to go easier on a Democratic politician. So I guess he can only investigate Independents. The whole thing is absurd. It's ridiculous. And I think it's a miscalculation by Donald Trump.
[Brian Tyler Cohen] Couldn't the argument be made that if it wasn't his wife, Republicans would find some uncle, some cousin who donated to a Democrat, and just suggest that that person is in the bag for the Left. like, let's not pretend that this whole thing wasn't always just a conclusion in search of evidence as far as Republicans are concerned.
[Glenn Kirschern] Yeah, this is PR. Nothing Donald Trump is saying has to do with the substance of the criminal investigation being conducted into either his theft of government documents that he then unlawfully concealed at Mar-A-Lago, or his inciting and insurrection, his attempt to overthrow the government on January 6. So this is just more of Donald Trump's nonsense, his shenanigans. It may appeal to some small segment of Trump's base. Trump may convince them that, you know, this is just more of a witch hunt, more of a hoax. But I think serious people, and critical thinkers, know to sort of dismiss these attacks out of hand.
[Brian Tyler Cohen] One more thing. I'm sorry, but are Republicans suggesting here that someone can't seek Justice because they feel that someone's wife's political activity is disqualifying? Like, are we really having that conversation right now? And, uh, this is me staring at you Glenn in full Jinni Thomas here.
[Glenn Kirschner] Yeah, the conflict presented by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas deciding he could preside over a case in which his wife has a direct interest.
[Brian Tyler Cohen] A direct interest, as opposed to having donated what she donated to Biden, and then she donated seven times in the amount of ten dollars to Democrats through Act Blue. That's the big Smoking Gun here.
[Glenn Kirschner] Yeah, well, the saying is "consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, and apparently of Donald Trump and his lackeys, loyalists, and enablers." So you know, all of this is Much Ado About Nothing. But this is Donald Trump's Playbook, right? Just try to, you know, make villains out of anybody interested in enforcing the law or holding him accountable. And here's the thing Brian, it's worked pretty well for him thus far. I do think he's running out of rope, particularly with the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith
Direct interest definition
Direct interest means a pecuniary interest in the persons involved in a matter before the agency, and applies to the agency member or employee, the agency member's or employee's relatives, or an individual with whom or business in which the member or employee has a pecuniary interest. As used in this subdivision (5), "relative" means a spouse, parent, child, stepparent, stepchild, grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, half-brother, half-sister, aunt, uncle, niece, or nephew by blood, marriage, or adoption;
Direct interest means an interest that is held in the name of the individual.
Direct interest means a pecuniary interest in the persons involved in a matter before the Agency. This interest applies to The Agency member or employee, The Agency
Examples of Direct interest in a sentence
Direct or indirect interest Direct interest Nature of indirect interest (including registered holder) Note: Provide details of the circumstances giving rise to the relevant interest.
Direct interest in this case means direct-line of ownership i.e. this can include real property that is indirectly held through companies.
Direct interest rate investments...............................................
Direct interest" means a pecuniary interest in the persons involved in a matter before the agency, and applies to the agency member or employee, the agency member's or employee's relatives, or an individual with whom or business in which the member or employee has a pecuniary interest.
Direct interest in 79,461 ordinary shares allocated under the Australian Finance Group Ltd Long Term Incentive Plan.
More Definitions of Direct interest
Direct interest means a contract with a person personally or with a business in which the person is the proprietor, a partner, or the person having the controlling interest in the business.
Direct interest means any contract to provide goods or services to the Commission as a result of a bid process or any other business transaction with a:
Direct interest means and includes the holding or possession of any direct ownership interest in any property or business or the holding of any real or beneficial use of such property or business, including any interest owned or held by the spouse of the official or employee if such interest in held jointly or as tenants in common.
Direct interest as defined in the recitals to this Agreement.
Direct interest means any contract for goods or services as a result of a bid process with:
Direct interest means the holding, by a person, of shares in a company;”;
Direct interest means a pecuniary interest in the persons involved in a matter before the agency, and applies to the agency member or employee, the agency member's or employee's relatives, or an individual with whom or
Direct interest means any contract with the employee himself or with any business in which the employee is the sole proprietor, a partner, or the person having at least 5% ownership interest in the business.
Direct interest shall have the meaning set forth in the recitals of this Agreement.
Direct interest means a reasonable likelihood that circumstances of that person referred to in 1.1.16(a) be it natural or juristic, would be directly altered if a matter is decided in a particular way, including but not limited to, a reasonable likelihood that of that person referred to in 1.1.16(a) be it natural or juristic, would be directly altered if a matter is decided in a particular way, including but not limited to, a reasonable likelihood that
Direct interest means an interest that occurs when a member is likely to be directly affected if the matter is decided in a particular way. For example, a company controlled by the member is tendering for a contract that is being discussed by the council.
Direct interest means a contract with a person personally or with a business in which the person is the proprietor, a partner, or the person having the controlling interest in the business. "Controlling interest" means sufficient ownership in a business or company to control policy and management, including the ownership or control of the largest number of outstanding shares owned by any single individual in a business or company.
Direct interest means holding the equity interest in one’s own name.
Direct interest means a direct, absolute interest and does not include any per capita, fractional, proprietary, or equitable interest arising from a person’s membership in an Indian tribe;
Direct interest means where a Board member or a dependant is personally a supplier or employee of a supplier or where a Board member or dependant (individually or combined) directly holds a financial interest in a supplier which exceeds a 10% equity interest. A “dependant” for this purpose is a spouse (including a de-facto spouse), child under 18 years of age, or any other person who is financially dependant on the Board member;
-- Direct interest definition, by Law Insider
[Brian Tyler Cohen] Yeah, and I think that what you said about them looking for villains is spot on. And it's been a recurring theme for a really long time. I mean, they dined on Hillary Clinton for the better part of a decade. Uh, during Covid, because they absolutely couldn't allow Donald Trump to be blamed for his own actions as President during Covid, they needed to find Anthony Fauci, and so they made him the villain of Covid. It's always finding one person, because attacking an idea or a theory is too too nebulous, an agenda is too nebulous. So instead they need to find one person to pin the blame on, and then they can just absolutely ruin that person's life. But make them the villain for all of their woes. And so their people are never responsible because it's always it's always some -- I mean, they've done it to even this guy Rayaps who was one of their own guy. But they were so desperate to find somebody to blame for January 6th, that they made this poor guy who was a Republican, who was there because he was sympathetic with Donald Trump, and they made him the villain. They just need to always find somebody to pin the blame on so that one of their own people isn't responsible for their own actions.
[Glenn Kirschner] And remember what Donald Trump did to lifelong Republican Bob Muller, special counsel investigating Trump Russia. Bob was my chief of homicide. He taught me much of what I know about being a federal homicide prosecutor. That lifelong Republican became what? "An angry Democrat." You know, "leading a team of 11 or 17 angry Democrats." I mean, here's the good news. Jack Smith feels like a real "without fear or favor" kind of guy. My friends and former colleagues that work directly with him, and for him, have really just sung his praises about, you know, being the kind of person who does his job without fear or favor. Let the name calling come. I have a feeling that will not derail or slow down Jack Smith, not for one minute.
[Brian Tyler Cohen] Yeah, and and I think that there's also a good degree of the the boy who cried wolf here, because Trump has done it every single time to the point where now he's doing it, it's falling on deaf ears, doesn't matter, he's sung this song before, and like you said, we'll just move on. So with that said, let's move on to Mike Pence, Mike Pence has "closed the door on appearing before the January 6 committee." He said that, "Congress has no right to my testimony." Could Congress still subpoena Pence to testify, or given the impending Republican majority, is this thing pretty much DOA as far as Pence appearing is concerned?
[Glenn Kirschner] Listen, the J6 committee is up and running until January 3rd. They could certainly still issue a subpoena to Mike Pence. You know, I think Mike Pence has all but disqualified himself from ever holding high government office in the future. Here's why I say that. With those seven words, "Congress is not entitled to my testimony," what has Mike Pence shown himself to be? Congress, remember, is conducting this investigation of the insurrection for a legislative reason. And in fact, several courts have ruled the J6 committee has a legitimate legislative purpose. They're trying to figure out what laws they need to pass to make sure nothing like this ever happens again. Nobody in the future can attack our democracy, and try to stop the peaceful transfer of power the way Donald Trump and his cronies did. That is their legislative goal. And against that backdrop, Mike Pence who is arguably the single most important fact witness in what Congress is investigating, said "I will not participate in Congress's endeavor to legislate to make sure nothing like this happens again." He has squarely sided with Donald Trump in an attempt to continue to cover up Donald Trump's crimes, then he has sided with the American people. And as you said Brian, he said, "I'm closing the door on Congressional testimony." Well, guess what? He can't close the door on Federal grand jury testimony. The next thing I predict will happen is Jack Smith and his team of federal prosecutors will drop a subpoena on Mike Pence's head. Now remember, they've taken the incremental step, they've asked Mike Pence for a voluntary interview, but people may not know prosecutors cannot compel somebody to come in and sit down for a voluntary interview, but a subpoena is a court order. It has the force of l. And it directs that person to be appear before the grand jury or suffer the legal consequence. So you know what? Mike Pence may or may not agree to the voluntary interview that Jack Smith's prosecutors have requested, it's all beside the point. Because I can promise you that there is no prosecutor worth his or her salt that would neglect to put Mike Pence before the Federal grand jury investigating the Insurrection, and Mike Pence cannot close the door on appearing before the grand jury, and testifying about what he knows. Once he's in there he can try to raise privileges, and they can litigate those privileges. That's a separate issue. Mike Pence will see the inside of a grand jury hearing room.
[Brian Tyler Cohen] Glenn, if you were prosecuting this case, if you were investigating this case, what would you hope to uncover from Pence's testimony, if he was compelled to testify before a grand jury?
[Glenn Kirschner] Direct evidence of Donald Trump's guilt of any number of crimes. The reason I call it "direct evidence," there's "direct evidence" and "circumstantial evidence." Let me just quickly give you the difference between the two. If a fact of consequence was whether it was raining outside at a particular time, if I'm awake and I'm looking out the window, and I see it raining, I can provide a jury direct evidence that it was raining. My testimony that I saw it raining, is direct evidence. Now, let's assume I go to bed, and when I go to bed the ground is dry. When I wake up, the ground is wet. I can testify about those facts. It's circumstantial evidence that it rained while I was asleep, but it's not direct evidence, right? Maybe the sprinklers kicked on overnight. Maybe that's why the ground is wet now. Now the law does not make a distinction between the quality of, or the value of direct evidence versus circumstantial evidence. Mike Pence has direct evidence of Donald Trump's guilt, his guilt of, for example, tampering with a government official in the performance of his duties. Why? Because Mike Pence can say, "Donald Trump said 'X, Y, and Z' directly to me in his determination to get me to violate the law, the Electoral count act, and refuse to certify Joe Biden's win." Those words out of Donald Trump's mouth, as witnessed by an eyewitness like Mike Pence, is direct evidence of Donald Trump's guilt. And that is evidentiary gold to a prosecutor.
[Brian Tyler Cohen] I think what's especially ironic about this is that we've heard numerous times now how Pence understood the importance of rebuffing Trump that day. So does it not make it all the more insane now that he would then bend over backwards to protect him, by coming out and saying that he outright is 'Closing the door' on testifying for the January 6 committee? But isn't it worse to some degree, because he's already broadcast that he knows better?
[Glenn Kirschner] You know, not only that he knows better, but he put some of these revelations in a book right that he is now hawking, and profiting off of, but he's unwilling to be placed under oath, and give some of that same information to either the J6 Committee, or ultimately to the federal prosecutors and the grand jury? It makes absolutely no sense. He's trying to walk a tightrope, but the tightrope is like, you know, unraveling, and no matter how, you know, carefully he tries to balance himself, he is going to fall right into the drink full of alligators, because he's got nowhere to go. And Brian, I think we have to ask ourselves, "Who in the world does he think is his constituency?" The Trump supporters that were announcing they wanted to hang him on January 6th? Is this who he's carrying favor with in his determination not to go against Donald Trump publicly? It makes no sense from a political perspective.
[Brian Tyler Cohen] Yeah, it makes no sense from a human perspective. I mean, again, like the only thing thing that he's salvaging here is the support from those people who who again wanted him hanged. And even if Trump didn't run, they still wouldn't uh vote for Pence at the end of the day. And I guess that this is what this is all about. Uh, maybe he thinks he still has some electoral hopes that survive. But I think this is just another example of the delusion on display. Um, you know, this is also someone who just days ago he was confronted on Fox -- I believe it was by Brett Baer -- with Trump's attempts to have him hanged on January 6th. And Pence responded by saying that Trump was, quote "My president and my friend." Here's a clip:
[Former Vice President Mike Pence] I was always loyal to president Donald Trump. He was my president, and he was my friend."
[Brian Tyler Cohen] Okay ,so legal stuff aside Glenn, uh, we're both from New Jersey, not exactly the softest place in the world. For a party that beats its chest for being alphas, uh, where would you rate this on the alpha scale?
[Glenn Kirschner] Yeah, Mike Pence seems to have, you know, checked whatever manhood he has at the door when he agreed to become Donald Trump's running mate. I mean, it really is embarrassing. And how somebody can allow himself and his family -- I believe his wife, and perhaps other family members were in the Capitol on January 6th -- how somebody like that can allow Donald Trump to endanger his life, and the life of his family members, and not stand up and say, 'Enough is enough. Not only did he endanger democracy, he endangered me and my family, and everybody in the Capitol that day. And frankly, if I don't stand up for that, if I don't stand up for myself, and my family, and the American people, well then, how in the world can I ever be trusted with your vote to stand up for America in the future'? I mean, I don't think Mike Pence has any political future.
yeah yeah 14:51 um okay so let's let's finish off with 14:53 this different topic here but Congress 14:55 is finally allowed to have access to 14:57 Trump's tax returns so which chamber in 14:59 Congress is going to get them and at 15:01 this point what are we really expecting 15:03 to see from them 15:05 so I think the house should get them 15:07 pretty promptly well before the new 15:09 Congress has sworn in in January and I 15:13 don't really think the fact that 15:15 Congress will finally get its hands on 15:17 Donald Trump's tax returns will have 15:19 much of an impact on any of the pending 15:21 criminal investigations but here's will 15:23 it where it will have an impact I mean I 15:26 think the American people deserve to 15:29 have a conflict-free president and we 15:32 all know Donald Trump had all of these 15:34 Financial entanglements with foreign 15:37 countries with foreign Banks you know we 15:40 don't know if he was doing a foreign 15:43 country spitting if he was doing 15:44 America's bidding if he was doing his 15:47 own personal financial bidding in the 15:50 years he was in the white house but I 15:52 think the American people need to know 15:55 those things and one of the ways we'll 15:57 get to know those things is once if we 15:59 look at Donald Trump's tax returns and 16:01 we see these entanglements and we learn 16:04 of conflicts well then Congress needs to 16:06 legislate they need to legislate some 16:09 transparency with respect to people who 16:12 are seeking High office and their 16:15 financial entanglements like it has 16:18 always been custom or tradition for 16:21 people running for the office of the 16:23 presidency to voluntarily disclose their 16:26 tax returns Donald Trump said I'm not 16:29 doing it and then he claimed it was 16:31 because he was forever under audit I 16:34 have no idea if that's accurate or not I 16:37 suspect not but I think Congress needs 16:40 to legislate so that this situation 16:42 never occurs right we need to know the 16:45 financial status and Investments and as 16:48 I say entanglements of the people who 16:50 are running for high government in 16:51 office so we can make our decision as 16:54 voters being fully informed and I'd 16:56 imagine if something is going to happen 16:58 it's going to happen soon before the new 16:59 Congress takes power because it doesn't 17:02 look like a republican-led house is 17:04 going to do anything to to you know to 17:07 quell the uh the power of uh of you know 17:10 another billionaire or this billionaire 17:12 who uh who wants to run for office and 17:14 Lead that party so we'll leave it there 17:15 with that said please subscribe to both 17:16 of our channels to hear more the links 17:18 are right here on the screen both to 17:19 Brian Tyler Cohen and Glenn kirschner 17:21 with that said this is the legal 17:23 breakdown I'm Brian Tyler Cohen and I'm 17:25 Glenn kirschner 17:28 [Music]
Donald Trump's attack on wife of Special Counsel Jack Smith is a sign of Trump's desperation Glenn Kirschner Nov 26, 2022
Donald Trump feels the hot breath of justice on the back of his neck. He knows the evidence against him is piling up, so instead of attack the message, Trump decides to attack the messenger. Or, more accurately, the messenger's spouse.
Here's why Trump's attack on Katy Chevigny, wife of Special counsel Jack Smith, will prove to be a miscalculation.
Transcript
[Glenn Kirschner] So facing multiple criminal investigations, Donald Trump decides that a good strategy would be to attack the prosecutor's spouse. Let's talk about that, because Justice matters. Hey all, Glenn kKrschner here. So, when the evidence against you is strong, is compelling, is overwhelming, when the message hurts you, what does a guy like Donald Trump do? Attack the messenger, or maybe the messenger's spouse. Here's the new reporting from Salon. Headline: Trump launches Truth Social war on new special counsel's wife. Trump and right-wingers claim special counsel Jack Smith's wife shows he can't be impartial. And that article begins: "Former president Donald Trump raged online after finding out that the wife of the special counsel, appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland, is a democratic donor who was involved in a documentary about former First Lady Michelle Obama. Justice Department career prosecutor Jack Smith was appointed by Garland to oversee investigations into Trump with the apparent goal of shielding the Department from accusations of partiality. Katy Chevigny, Smith's wife, was listed as a producer on "Becoming," the former first lady's 2020 documentary. She also donated $2,000.00 to President Joe Biden's 2020 campaign, according to FEC records. Trump took to Truth Social to rant about Chevigny and Smith, attaching screenshots of her tweets supporting the Democratic party, and accusing the Department of Justice of being biased in their investigation. quote 'This is just a small amount of information from the wife of the hard-line radical left special counsel prosecutor, an acolyte of Eric Holder, and Barack Hussein Obama,' he -- Trump -- wrote on Tuesday night." Okay, friends, let's unpack this latest Trump absurdity, this inane accusation that the spouse of a prosecutor can't hold political beliefs, or engage in political activity. So Trump alleges that if the prosecutor's spouse is a Democrat, well then, the prosecutor cannot go after, cannot investigate, cannot indict corrupt or criminal Republican politicians, because of the prosecutor's spouse's politics. That's absurd. And think about the corollary. Think about what Trump is really alleging here. Well, if the prosecutor's spouse is a Democrat, then the prosecutor shouldn't be allowed to go after Democrats either, because presumably, because of the prosecutor's spouse's politics, the prosecutor would go easy on Democrats . So if you take Trump's argument to its logical conclusion, if a prosecutor's spouse is political in any way, holds political beliefs, or engages in political activity, the prosecutor cannot prosecute anybody who's a Republican, or a Democrat Maybe they could prosecute an Independent. I'm sure Trump would complain about that as well. All of this is absurd. It's inane. What all of this really is is Donald Trump knowing in his gut that the evidence against him is compelling, it's strong, it's overwhelming. He's going to get got. And he knows it. He feels the hot breath of justice on the back of his neck. So what does he do? Well, if you can't defeat the message, you got to go after the messenger, maybe the messenger's spouse. Here's what I can tell you friends. When I was prosecuting cases, if the evidence was compelling, well then what did the attack become? It was an attack on the prosecutor, and his or her integrity. It was an attack on the FBI agents who were conducting the investigation. Maybe it was an attack on the judge. And if you're a really small, pathetic person like Donald Trump, maybe it's the prosecutor's spouse, or family. The FBI agent's spouse, or family. The judge's spouse, or family. None of this is going to work. And all of it is a sign of desperation. Because I think Trump finally knows that accountability is coming for him. And this latest attack on Jack Smith, the special counsel's spouse, I predict will not slow Jack Smith's work down not by one minute, not by one millimeter. Nor does it present any kind of a conflict. Think about it. If the target of an investigation could create a conflict by attacking the prosecutor's spouse and then maybe somehow convincing people that the prosecutor's got to go, well, wouldn't that just encourage guys like Donald Trump to go after the prosecutor's spouse or family member? None of this will work. And it feels like perhaps that long last accountability is coming for Donald Trump. Justice is coming for Donald Trump. And justice matters. Friends, as always, please stay safe, please stay tuned, and I look forward to talking with you all again tomorrow.