that the rule of the strong always wins. the question is, can those who would follow donald trump to the edge of the cliff and a heck of a lot of folks who would fall off the cliff, are they willing to put an allegiance to the constitution ahead of their allegiance to him or a partisan victory? that is a big question. perhaps, to answer what is in some ways a rhetorical question, you have trump as the gop front runner. he s facing 91 criminal counts and the four indictments, and the reaction from some republican voters is a shrug. the reaction from most republican leaders is a shrug. what does that tell you about that sense of shame not just on the part of donald trump, but the idea that the shame would need to be shared, the idea that responsibility would need to be shared. it s a particularly gloomy moment. the way the constitution is set up, we need two functioning parties that are basically loyal to the constitution. we need two parties that will
thomas paine were even before the revolutionary war was well underway that in america, the law is king. we don t have kings, we have the law. as the drama unfolded, the constitution, the amendment at the constitution, an entire ethos in which we understood that not a single one of us was more important than the law itself. as it says in the bible, too much is given, much is expected. to the president at the united states, so much power is given, and it s expected that they will ultimately follow the law. even richard nixon towards the end of 1974, he broke the law but ultimately had a sense of shame and sense that he had to protect the ultimate constitutional system. former president trump, there is no evidence whatever that he is at risk of sharing that
he s easily recognizable. none of those corners are going to be done in fulton county. it s going to be circus. i think trump is going to revel in that circus. the challenge for him is that with all of the destructions he s trying to pull, at the end of the day, the this atlanta case, this fulton county case, it s ultimately going to be impacting the other cases he has. the january 6th case that jack smith has ultimately is a lot of overlap with this atlanta case. what i actually expect that ultimately he s going to find that a lot of the witnesses that testified are not going to be as enthusiastic about testifying. i think he s got a more difficult road ahead than him and his team let me ask you about that, renata, that governor kemp thinks this is going to be protected for into the future? i don t disagree with him in the sense that fani willis threw the book at donald trump. 19 defendants. every count imaginable. rico has been charged. that s a very complex sprawling case. jac
it crosses the legal threshold when falsehoods are employed to facilitate criminal deeds. samuel double buell, a law professor and former prosecutor, perhaps sums it up best, speaking to the new york times, bill says there is no first amendment privilege for giving directions or suggestions to other people to engage in illegal acts. tony soprano cannot invoke the first amendment for telling his crew he wants someone whacked. special counsel jack smith outlined 21 false the surgeons made by trump that were allegedly used to persuade others to engage in criminal conduct. here is some of the bigger lies noted in the indictment. trump claimed and continues to claim that massive fraud change the outcome of the 2020 election and that he, in fact, one. this remains his overarching big lie, if you, will about the election, despite knowing that this narrative was false. as the indictment points out, numerous senior officials in his administration had told him this was false. he persisted and sp
so, if you lose, you can go to court, you can ask for recounts. but you cannot change the law. donald trump wanted to change the law to the point that if we do not certify the election in all possibility, he could be held over as president until this issue is resolved. we cannot do that in a democracy. i m convinced that his at that time, who were telling him he could do certain things, they were wrong. his attorney general, his general counsel and others were quite specific. you lost the election. for whatever reason, he refused to accept it, promote it, and an alternate process. it s the promotion of that alternate theory in terms of the election that has gotten him in trouble. congressman, always good to talk to you. thank, you sir. thank you for the important