they came out and said no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. only an unreasonable prosecutor would bring this charge against the former president. the new york times surveyed legal analysts and found according to their research, the new york da s office in manhattan has never brought a charge on a federal campaign violation before. this would be unprecedented. you have to think it would only happen because of the last name of the person they are going after. as a former federal and criminal attorney this is important for viewers to understand. number one to that point that was the underlying charge upon which this was elevated to a felony. that s why in part it was so filmsy, yet untested in these waters. over 98% of grand jury convenes results in an indictment. if it does not, it absolutely illustrates what you just said, which is the filmsy nature of this presentation by the prosecution. how utterly preposterous.
Transcripts for FOXNEWS Outnumbered 20240604 16:00:30
archive.org - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from archive.org Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
that some people have been wanting to see lived out for years. this is mueller. this is the january 6th investigation. this is election collusion and russia collusion. it s all of that in one ball. they re trying to now force it into not only a filmsy case, but a case that hinges, and people should make note, on a porn star and a disbarred lawyer caught lying and spent time in federal prison for it. when this is what you re standing this case on, for first time in history, again, with a president of the united states, former or current, i think you ve got to go in with better ammunition than that. but the fantasia, the political pressure to get him on anything, get him now, drag him, give him the perp walk. wanting to shame this particular president is, i think, a sought
harris: what s interesting, too, about this for both of you, and everybody really, but both of you on this legal point. when the former da here in new york city, when the justice department and even in his employ as well alvin bragg passed on the initial case many years ago. they were saying similar things about that case. hush money isn t technically against the law in the state. it was already filmsy. that s the perfect word. they then went to this next level, campaign. tried to bring some other things into it. why do all of that flexing? are some of those who are watching this correct when they say this is purely politics? that s been a lot of the drum beat from republicans. as you saw in that montage, this is a political fantasia
after wish they want under any circumstances. harris: when you say they, you mean democrats who would want this. when i say him, i mean alvin bragg. he knows better because he s already looked at this case. it boggles my mind whether or not there will be an indictment at all. tammy, i see you nodding over there. the idea of politics playing a role in this. does this help alvin bragg even if there s no indictment? if he loses the case, whatever happens, does this help him? the democrats are always focused on winning a news cycle. they look at it from news cycle to news cycle. you see all if bad news for joe biden, for democrats. the banking crisis. china s meeting with russia. they re having a party. the world is crumbling a bit. this is a great distraction. it also proves trump s point and the point of many americans certainly tens of millions of them. that our system is geared to go
vimarsana © 2020. All Rights Reserved.