to dig deep to pull this out, this case that had fallen by the wayside. the doj hasn t pursued it. the fec didn t pursue it was this case worth it prosecutors aren t supposed to consider politics or political party or justice is supposed to be blind you follow the facts wherever they go and if it leads to a crime, by not bringing it, you would be treating him differently. they do have discretion. that s true you know, the people who say this isn t a worthwhile case, again, i guess you could also view it as it was the first donald trump looked to interfere with an election the second time being january 6th. that s number one. number two, all those 11 payments he made, those were made while he was a sitting
someone paid to be impartial, is something we saw throughout the campaign and during his tenure in the white house a page from the political playbook here as donald trump tries to define the conflict he s in as purely political, when in this case it s a legal one, not a political one. what is it going to take for the d.a. to bring a felony charge what does it take to make this falsifying of documents case a felony charge? the falsifying of business records is normally a misdemeanor, up to a year in prison the falsification here would be writing on the books and records of the trump organization that that hush money was legal experiences and categorizing it in the phony way would be what makes it a false business
it s the abuse of the prosecutorial function to engage in a political hit job it s a disgrace if it turns out to be what we think it is. politically it s going to be damaging, i think, to the republican party simply because i think it s a no lose situation for the democrats. i think the emphasis is to help trump get the nomination legally i think it s, from what i understand, it s a pat pathetically weak case. david, what do you think about what barr is saying? he s expressing his opinion and saying it s a plot by democrats to get alvin bragg to bring this case so that trump secures the nomination i don t think that s what s
indicted i can t confirm that is happening today. we re in the window where the secret service has a lot to go through. they are in unchartered territory. the clock is ticking towards the arraignment. talk about the way donald trump is talking about the judge who will be presiding over that arraignment. reporter: it s familiar to folks like you and me and anybody else who covered donald trump in 2016. this is right out of his political playbook to target anyone who might be targeting him as a perceived political enemy. he s posting on truth social about the judge who will oversee this case, saying the judge hates him. this is the judge who presided over the allan weisselberg case. the idea of attacking a judge,
contribution from michael cohen. the commission, once again, couldn t do anything because the republicans refused to go forward. the democrats didn t have enough votes. it didn t get a lot of attention at the time, katy. we thought this case was behind us the d.a. declined to do anything with it. now, it s relevant that those people that look at election law thought, yes, the law was violated. let me ask you about the difficulty here. is there difficulty when the doj has not brought a federal election case against donald trump? they put michael cohen in prison for a campaign finance violation. individual one was donald trump in that indictment they never brought a case against donald trump now alvin bragg is that s right. does that make it more difficult? it raises questions they didn t do it even after