there s a long record sense donald trump really ascended to the height of the republican party of disrespect for uniform military officers, of attacks on the military itself. on efforts to put in this case, culture war issues above the health and readiness of the force and those military families. i think this is the kind of thing that really, really does resonate. you saw in the 2020 election even in some of these midterm elections in these veteran communities, these issues really hurt donald trump and republican party. it is a masked vulnerability and about defining national security and foreign policy, but also just on the basic respect for the men and women who carry out american and foreign defense policy. this should be a no brainer and i think it s a really important contrast for democrats to be drawing for the next year and a
the disclosure of their text messages. the judge in the case has said they can do that, but the justice department is still fighting that. this filing came out in the course of that. kelly says that he never acted on what trump wanted, but this was trump s desire. and it s just another example and sort of the this pile of stuff where trump was trying in any way possible to harness the powers of the federal government for his political ends and his political errands. this was him trying to use the law enforcement and investigative powers of the executive branch against his enemies. in the case of kelly, he s saying, look, trump certainly entertained this idea and it was something he wanted. and, mike, there s a difference between using the justice department against his enemies, which he also did with great relish, in the same pattern he would tweet something
its date is in january. the judge knows this. the judge knows that if this trial doesn t occur bit end of this calendar year that it is going to be right up in the grille of people deciding who the republican nominee for president should be. and right now, the definitive favorite is, in fact, the defendant in this case. so i think that there should be tremendous pressure on her to accept the date the government wants in order to get out of the way of what is going to occur during the silly season of these presidential primaries that will begin and be really over by march. so, she will either be trying the presumptive republican nominee in 2023 or she ll probably be trying the nominee for president in 2024. this is uncharted waters for american politics. this is bizarre stuff.
lot of visibility into who they thought won the election and exactly what they worried about into and out of january 6th. well, just to defend claire for a moment. i do think that this is somebody who s been sued so many times. and has brought lawsuits that he has really learned where the lines are and that s why in some ways, that s actually a very useful thing when you re bringing either a civil or criminal case because you get to see where he knows sort of what he can do and not do which helps with proving. in terms of the case against fox news, one of the thing ss whether they get to the discovery phase where there could be just as many damning internal communications as we
what s so interesting, andrew weissmann, is the defamation exposure that fox news faces is from all sides. fox news also faces a case that the times has reported on from someone who ran disinformation, was going to work on a disinformation campaign for the biden administration, is now suing fox for defamation. $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit looms as large as the epps case does. and something i ve talked to jeremy peters about and nick and others that have covered fox is that what seems to be at the center of all of these optimistic lawsuits, i guess i ll put it in the sort of point of view of epps and others, is that the known falsity ruling by the judge in the dominion case. once it was clear fox knew they were broadcasting lies, they had a whole lot of legal exposure. how do you assess fox s legal