case is about. laura: well a blatantly false a blatantly false statement. here s the onl y thingin ifn lawyers need to know about this case.ft if after the twenterytion twenty election, donald trump had announced that he was retiring from politics,indict alvin would not have indicted him.ed or let s say if after 2020, trump had gradually evolved ind his views and maybe became more like romney or one of the bushes in that case,ve ind alvin bragg would not haveic indicted him. the real reason that donald trump was bookedngerprin and fingerprinted today comes down to one simple fact. wrong he has the wrongs political views. now to the entire class of politicians and media figures who cheered the proceedings today. donaldding trump represents an existential threat, a threat to the regim thee that s run our country into the ground fort decades, a threat to the credibilit tibility y the mediae calls out relentlessly. but most significant of all,um another trump term is a threata
president being called forward, not even on a felony, butally really a a misdemeanor in drag t best. atk that says a lotng more about the people bringing these charges than the does about donald trump. pivot but president trump has to pivot off of thisf to a plae of vision and positivity and american drive much like we saw from reagan in and american drive , much like we saw from reagan in the 80s. yeah, i agree. agree and ruand ru n on energy. going to i m going to here when i m president. your gas is going to go back to tw0 o dollars, 20 centse a gallon because we re goingll d to drill where we can drill take the cuffs off the oil and we re going to take the cuffs off the oil and gas industry. congressman, thank you both. hrs all right. joining us now is chris swecker, former prosecutor, former fbir fom an assistant dit chris , i want to brinhig this all back to this fundamental concept of equal justice under the law. okay, that s what we all thought our criminal justice system was
eight o clock or whatever . it won t matter. big so i think that s the bigeat to challenge. your panel s, great to see all f you. thank you.s thank for the indictment itself. the it itselfis is boilerplan it doesn t allege any federal crime, any state crime that sse been violated. it doesn t allege what the fals e statement is . a state prosecutora fede is prosecuting federal election law violation. that doesn t exist according to federal election law officials. e w officials. it s as simple as it s as simple as that. right now to campaign this point is right. the fec decided not to pursuee a complaint against trump for cog campaign finance rules. so why is alvin bragg joining me now? vimpaign finis a man who undersn brad smith, former commissioner and chairman of the federal election commission. brad , a lot of people hear the acronym fec and their eyes tot you re reallylaze in the spotlight with this this case going on and you said this is all based on a misunderstanding of fed
dors attorney , let s start over. i think what the theory is , is that the federal law says that anything that is made, any expenditure, money that is made for the purpose of influencing an election is therefore a political contribution. and thus president trump had to pay any funds to stormyaudien daniels with campaign funds and reportce them as such.ecutor but the thing is that key phrases for the purpose of influencing an election. but that doesn t mean the subjective intent of the spender or the donor. in other words, if i think that it would be really useful to help president trump win the election, by making a contribution to the national rifle association right. that s not a campaign expenditure. despite my subjective intent or to put it in the candidate s term. if a candidate says i need tha to have a really nice looking ay suit for the debate and he mad spent so much money on a suite he would not normally spend,l that doesn t become a campaign danie expenditure. it s still a p