in the target letter. i m interested the complexity of the potential case if those are the potential charges pursued. yeah. if you look at deprivation of civil rights and conspiracy to commit an offense against the united states, those will cover largely the same ground. we ll talk about the whole scheme we just laid out. i think jack smith is doing this intentionally because he wants to be able to show that this is, in fact, a coordinated effort that wept across the country and that hit at the state, local and federal levels. i think also if we look at tampering with a witness, that s really important because first of all, who will this witness be? donald trump has a history from the mueller investigation on of trying to influence what witnesses say. that could be really damaging. that s a crime on its own and shows corrupt intent as to the broader picture here. so again, those i think are not surprising. it shows that jack smith is trying to view this as a whole and not getting int
interesting about deprivation of civil rights. i don t know if that is directed at the voters. or it could be directed to mike pence, efforts there to pressure him to abuse the power that he had. and witness tampering is interesting. it may be that there was some witnesses who were pressured by trump or some member of his campaign to tell lies, or destroying evidence. so an interesting collection. so it sounds interesting. and let s take a look at some of the big names that we know of who have testified before jack smith and the grand jury there in d.c. these are the ones that may look familiar to our viewers of course. former vice president, mike pence, trump s son-in-law, jared kushner, former trump aide hope hicks. there were dozens of others we
mentioned a few minutes ago with the rights of the voters, they potentially open it up to where he can get discovery and look into just about everything, all of the claims of election fraud that they raised back then can all be relitigated here. so i kind you have wonder if that was not something i was expecting hem to get into that much depth on. i don t know if that one is something that they will actually include. you know, certainly conspiracy to defraud is something that we had looked at when i was on the team, and then that the obstruction or witness tampering or whatever section they are going to use, that s also consistent with what i kind of was looking at, at the time. from a planning and, obviously, you haven t been on the team for a bit p but the idea of deprivation of civil rights is not something, while you were there, had been considering or working through? no, because we were looking at from the perspective in an obstruction or fraud count,
this way. the deprivation of civil rights charge, that does seem to be something that they re going to try to apply in a novel fashion which is not something you would generally want to do in such a politically-charged case. this he potentially open it up to where he can get discovery and look into just about everything, all of the claims of election fraud that they raised back then can all be relitigated here. shan, what do you think about that deprivation of civil rights? that s an interesting charge. i think we have to caution ourselves that the reports we have had of the target letter it s not that clear yet exactly how the charges are going to narrow down. the deprivation of rights it could be the deprivation of all the u.s. voters rights were being interfered with or it could be as narrow as his interference with pence s duties or these fake electors, the actual electors, their rights were being interfered with so it s a little bit unclear. i m not sure i agree with tim s
learning about this case. not to profess their guilt, that s what a trial will be form. the district attorney will be looking at a plethora of charges, whether it was a reckless killing, the confinement of him and then you go to the federal level and to the extent that the u.s. attorney is investigating, they ll be looking at deprivation of civil rights and liberties. anyone s background will be examined very closely. chief ramsay, what do you make of how quickly these five police officers were actually fired? well, i know chief davis. she s a very, very good police chief. she definitely saw the video and what she saw must have disturbed her to the point where she knew she needed to take immediate action and she did take immediate action. in memphis they re able to do so. the collective bargaining