laura: well a blatantly false statement. here s the only thing non-lawyers need to know about this case. if after the 2020 election donald trump had announced that he was retiring from politics, alvin bragg would not have indicted him or if let s say after 2020 trump had gradually evolved in his views and maybe became more like romney or one of the bushes. in that case, alvin bragg would not have indicted him. the real reason that donald trump was booked and fingerprinted today comes down to one simple fact. he has the wrong political views. now, the entire class of politicians and media figures who cheered the proceedings today, donald trump represents an existential threat to the regime that s run our country into the ground for decades, a threat to the credibility of the media that he calls out relentlessly. but most significant of all another trump turn is a threat to the biden family and their nonstop grift machine. alvin bragg is more like alvin bag because he s nothi
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
why the fec didn t charge trump. watch this. on the federal level they said they declined. before they have written about it in a memo but they declined to prosecute, at first because he was president, and then, effectively because they had other things like the insurrection that they were trying to deal with. they never declined to prosecute because they didn t they didn t say that the law didn t apply to trump. laura: is that accurate? well, it s true that they didn t decline to prosecute because they didn t say well the law doesn t apply to trump. of course the law applies to trump. what they held was that the law was not violated at least not a majority on the commission to pursue that. again it goes back to the idea that not everything that might influence a campaign meets that statutory definition. in facts it s worse than that because it s actually illegal to spend your campaign funds for
the more, chris , and this t isu good point to raise with you.the i mean, the democrats go witha brass knuckles. hardknow, trump s a fighter, too.ch they so he hits bacrek at them hard,. which they re not used to . liky chris is exactly right. they re used to the kind ofusedt the velvet glove treatment fromt the mitch mcconnell s side ochf the aisle.si but but in this casef th, you he a focus on getting this man sto. and getting him again f and getting him again.in they re not going to stop. right.t th and we find ouatt tonight thatbc the wisconsin supreme court flipped and became controlledgo by the democrats.o there was that one race thatrepc they thought might go to the republicanant.. republicans lost that. so the republican party hasus enormous challenges even inreatd the headwinds that the democrats have created w some this horrific economy.e so youwhere. got to get more voo tesome somewhere. you ve gotpo to get the votes in order to have the power. democrats last election in. t
country. but in mentioning the other case, which is the documents case, and going into some detail about that case and making comments about that case, is there any danger in litigating that separate investigation while talking about this investigation, or am i being overly sensitive here? no, look, you ve made a good point, i think. but i think that president trump feels under siege with these cases. he sees them as they are simply an attack on his candidacy and all part of one sort of bundle of attacks. so he s frustrated and he s talking about, as he feels appropriate, talking about these other so-called investigations. and it s a shame because, you know, obviously the goal is to distract him from the real issues and as i ve suggested he must keep talking about the real issues. that it s what people want to hear from him and his lawyers need to fight the case. laura: sol your reaction to