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
ce or jeback with me now, the ll eagles, david shewn, former trum schoen p impeachment lawyee and sol wisenberg, former assistant us attorney and deputy independent counsel. david , as we saputy indw with six , the standard for incitement to violence is very fungible in the eyes ofange rothe left. us prece so how dangerous a precedentg oe would a gag order be , a caselie like this where so much is on o the line, only the future of y the country given the twenty, twenty four stakes? yeah,ea a gag order i think k would be completely against the public interest in new york . l law is not terrible. his, gbackon this. cas you go back to nineteen eighty eight . there s a case, new york times co. versu sdge rothwell s, which the judge tried to gag the lawyers in the case and. to be and the court very clearly suppd said that any such order would have to be supportedd , detailed findings and cannot be overbroad. we have to use the least restrictive means and only curtail speech. that s