Speaking out for the first time. Why . This is not a normal election in any way. Certainly not one defined by policy debate. In one fell swoop, Donald Trump laid the groundwork to dispute the 2024 election just as did he in 2020. He threatened mass arrests of election officials, political opponents and critics and it landed like a Thunder Clap in the Saturday Night truth social post. It read in part, quote, when i win, those people that cheated will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Which will include longterm Prison Sentences so that this depravity of justice does not happen again. Please beware that this legal exposure extends to lawyers, political operatives, donors, illegal voters and corrupt election officials. Those involved in Inscrupulous Behavior will be sought out and caught and prosecuted at levels unfortunately never seen before in our country. And now you should know it includes a lot of nonsensical caps. A couple of long words that make me wonder who wrote i
sandusky until just this week. as the trial was going on, he apparently approached prosecutors and told them that his adopted father did molest him. jason carroll, cnn contributor and sarah gannon. jason, if matt sandusky s claims was known by the prosecution, why didn t they call him to testify? well, i think it s a good question. i think there s a question in terms of whether or not his testimony would have been admissible, for one reason, jerry sandusky is not charged with sexually abusing his son. i can tell you this. think of this scenario. let s say for example jerry sandusky had taken the witness stand and it said during his testimony i m a great father, i have a great relationship with my children. that, then, would have opened the door for the prosecution to call a rebuttal witness and my sources told me, if jerry sandusky had taken the stand, they were prepared to put matt sandusky on the stand as a rebuttal witness and my source tells me that his testimony would
sandusky until just this week. as the trial was going on, he apparently approached prosecutors and told them that he was molested. jason, if matt sandusky s claims was known by the prosecution, why didn t they call him to testify? well, i think it s a good question. i think there s a question in terms of whether or not his testimony would have been admissible, for one reason, jerry sandusky is not charged with sexually abusing his son. i can tell you this. think of this scenario. let s say for example jerry sandusky had taken the witness stand and it said during his testimony i m a great father, i have a great relationship with my children. that, then, would have opened the door for the prosecution to call a rebuttal witness and my sources told me, if jerry sandusky had taken the stand, they were prepared to put matt sandusky on the stand as a rebuttal witness and my source tells me that his testimony would have been, quote, very, very damaging. also let me backtrack a litt
prosecution during the trial. now, he was not called to the stand. we re going to get into why in just a minute because that s of course the question everybody wants to know the answer to. first, a bit of background. he went to live with the sanduskies as a foster child. he was later adopted. he had denied ever being abused by sandusky till just this week. as the trial was going on, he apparently approached prosecutors and told them his adopted father did molest him. joining me now live with the latest, national correspondent jason carroll. also cnn con trip tributor sara gannham. why didn t he call him to testify? i think that s a good question. there s a question in term of whether or not his testimony would have been admissible. for one reason, jerry sandusky is not charged with sexually abusing his son. i can tell you this, think of this scenario. let s say, for example, jerry sandusky had taken the witness stand and had said during his testimony, i m a great father, i
just a moment because that s the question everybody wants to know the answer to. matt sandusky is 33 years old now. he went to live with them as a foster child and he was later adopted. he denied ever being abused by sandusky until just this week. as the trial was going on, he apparently approached prosecutors and told them that he was molested. jason, if matt sandusky s claims was known by the prosecution, why didn t they call him to testify? well, i think it s a good question. i think there s a question in terms of whether or not his testimony would have been a admissib admissible, for one reason, jerry sandusky is not charged with sexually abusing his son. i can tell you this. think of this scenario. let s say for example jerry sandusky had taken the witness stand and it said during his testimony i m a great father, i have a great relationship with my children. that, then, would have opened the door for the prosecution to call a rebuttal witness and my sources told me, i