whether he has to follow the law, like anyone else would have to. so i think we don't need to be alarmist on that front. but as ruth says, things are always worse than you think they are going to be, once a dictator gets hold. and we know from some of the early comments that trump has made, and some of his planning, that he would plan to completely corrupt the law, to disrupt the justice department, to turn it in a political arm of the presidency, rather than a quasi-independent body that looks at criminal cases, and engages in prosecution based on the facts and the law. so there is significant reason for alarm, whether he succeeds with this motion to dismiss the criminal case based on presidential immunity or not. >> reporter: i always wonder, ruth, how much of this is legal. because what we saw was a legal argument the other day. and how much of this was donald trump. they've been saying that they've been able to campaign, he said no obligation to be in court when he was there on tuesday, of his own volition, in a role there. but, in iowa, a number of