because they only seem to reference his statements in connection with them as a conduit of a conspiracy allegation. the biden administration is going after their top opponent in the upcoming election by weaponizing the federal government. i mean that s clearly what s happening here, and you don t even have to be a supporter of president trump to see that. in fact, i think you re seeing a number of folks who don t even support president trump coming to his defense because they see just the ridiculous nature of what s going on and what a dangerous precedent this would set moving forward. let s talk about the precedent because, one, be clear for the audience for them to necessarily follow along in particular, just because a politician says something does not make it the level of political speech the courts will evaluate to figure out whether the government has infringed on those rights. it has to be something that according to these allegations they believe goes beyond political speec
of what is going on here. what they are doing is attacking president trump s first amendment rights. they are eviscerating the first amendment by indicting can you explain how you feel like this is addressing the first amendment? it only seems to address his statements and connection with them as a conduit of a conspiracy allegation. the biden administration is going after their top opponent in the upcoming election, but weaponizing the federal government. i mean, it s clearly what is happening here. you don t even have to be a support of president trump to see that. in fact, i think you are seeing a number of folks who don t even support president trump coming to his defense, because they see just the ridiculous nature of what is going on, and what a dangerous precedent this would set moving forward. let s talk about the precedent, because one, let s be clear to the audience or they can follow along, just because a politician says something does not make it the
afternoon. yes, it will be. and shortly after president trump makes his way into the courthouse, the court will have to order it to be unsealed unless there are co-conspirators that maybe still on the run, let s say and not apprehended or not having made their appearance in court. it will be unsealed and an interesting point of this is they have alleged a conspiracy. the reason why that is so important is the conspiracy allegation in federal court room requires over to be delineated on that paper. so if it tells a story that may give us better light as to what the crux of the obstruction charges are. trace: what do we take away from this, larry? your final thoughts. s final thoughts, trump, popular among the pace. more likely to be nominated and rally around him. fundraise off of all of this. trace: they are already fundraising. we are getting e-mails right now. are you surprised? as i said before, because of trump and not his fault for the most part, there are so many swing
conspiracy. when we look back at what we have seen coming out of mueller s office, there have been filings about how the russians were able to influence social media and the dex. there have been filings about the hacking into dnc e-mails and ricket s e-mails. there have been a number of filings detailing all of the people that people that lied in the ngs, there has not been any evidence or charges of conspiracy on the american side. do you think that is because the mueller team doesn t have it? are they building up a public case of sorts? what is your interpretation? i don t think they have it, i don t think it is there, all of this stuff i see with people looking at this indictment in terms of getting us closer to a conspiracy allegation, i think it is incorrect. if anything the indictment shows
the second thing is, it would obviously pose real legal problems for donald trump jr. who went to congress and said under penalty of perjury he never told his father about that meeting. if that turns out not to be true, it s punishable by up to five years in jail. you showed in the clips earlier, the people who work for the president, the president s lawyers all lied about this publicly. while lying publicly, lying to the press is not a crime, it can be powerful evidence of a cover up. if you are going to if bob mueller at the end of this is going to conclude that donald trump is trying to obstruct justice by ending the investigation, by covering up what happened, it will be both his actions privately in asking law enforcement officials to back off and his actions publicly in trying to cover up what happened that for the heart of that conspiracy allegation. congressman, let me ask you to pick up that thread and let me read you a footnote from the democratic house intel committee re